Punishment for cheating by personation
Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with punishment for cheating by personation. Whoever cheats by personation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1862. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Whoever cheats by personation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 419, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 319 Cheating by personation Close, with changes 81%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 3
- Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli s. 88
- Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act s. 28 Disqualification of membership etc. of committees
- Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders Land-Grabbers, Spurious Seed Offenders, Insecticide Offenders, Fertiliser Offenders, Food Adulteration Offenders, Fake Document Offenders, Scheduled Commodities Offenders, Forest Offenders, Gaming Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Explosive Substances Offenders, Arms Offenders, Cyber Crime Offenders and White Collar or Financial Offenders Act s. 17
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Internl. Adv. Res. Cen. for P. M. & N. M. vs Nimra Cerglass (p) Ltd.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
For an offence of cheating to be constituted under Section 420 IPC, the essential ingredients are: (i) making of a false representation; (ii) knowledge by the accused that representation is false; (iii) making the representation in order to deceive; and (iv) mens rea of dishonest inducement. Critically, the dishonest intention must exist at the time of making the inducement, not from subsequent failure to perform. A mere breach of contract, even if causing substantial financial loss, cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is demonstrated at the beginning of the transaction. When a technology transfer agreement explicitly provides for experimental development with contingency provisions for performance guarantee tests and liquidated damages, parties have contemplated possibility of failure to achieve specifications, negating the inference of dishonest intention at inception.
On this section: Cheating - cited as offence charged in complaint but ultimately not held applicable as essential ingredients not established
-
Monica Bedi vs State of A. P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an appellate court reviews sentences in a criminal appeal, even while maintaining convictions as sustainable, it possesses the discretionary power to reduce sentences if it finds them disproportionate or excessive in relation to the nature and gravity of the offence, the circumstances of the case, and principles of proportionality in sentencing. The exercise of such discretion should be rational, not arbitrary, and should serve the dual purposes of punishment and deterrence.
On this section: Cheating by personation - upheld, conviction maintained
-
Sarvjeet Herbert vs The State of Uttar Pradesh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When investigation into criminal charges is completed, chargesheet is filed, and the case is committed to the trial court, continued judicial custody of the accused pending trial—particularly when trial may take a considerable time—is not justified. The accused must be released on bail with appropriate conditions to ensure trial attendance, as extended pre-trial detention without conviction effectively constitutes punishment without trial and violates principles of justice. The Supreme Court will exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 to grant bail in such circumstances.
On this section: Sections cited to describe the offences for which petitioners were arrested: Section 419 (Punishment for Cheating by Personation), Section 420 (Cheating and Dishonestly Inducing Delivery of Property), Section 467 (Forgery of valuable security or will), Section 468 (Forgery for purpose of cheating), Section 471 (Using Forged as Genuine), Section 120-B (Punishment of Criminal Conspiracy). These are the substantive criminal charges underlying the bail petition.
-
Ashok Sandeep Singh vs The State of Uttar Pradesh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused has been in custody for an extended period (over one year) and the High Court has continuously adjourned bail proceedings without substantive hearing, while a stay on further proceedings has already been granted by the Supreme Court, interim bail should be granted pending final hearing of the Special Leave Petition, with terms and conditions to be imposed by the competent court.
On this section: Cheating by personation - allegedly used in obtaining illegal government appointment
-
Sanjay Kumar v. State of Bihar
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Patna HC oral judgment order-1.pdf 2015-04-16 DATE VERIFIED. Crl.Misc. 46035/2012 (s.482). Ashwani Kumar Singh J. Isolates IPC 419: cheating by personation as defined in s.416 — pretending to be another person (appearing in the Teachers’ Eligibility Test for the named roll-holder) supplies 419/420 ingredients at cognizance; 482 quash refused. Map ipc 419 cited only. Do not successor-map ipc 419 → bns 319 (mapping.csv close 0.8141). Do not pad ipc 420 (already filled).
On this section: IPC 419 cheating by personation is made out when the accused pretends to be another person to sit an examination; s.416 supplies the definition (Sanjay Kumar v. State of Bihar). Do not successor-map to bns 319 (close 0.8141).
-
S.syed Basha vs The State of A.p.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The bar under Section 195(1)(b)(i) Criminal Procedure Code applies only to offences under Sections 193-196, 199, 200, 205-211, and 228 IPC when committed in court proceedings, and to forgery offences under Sections 463, 471, 475, 476 IPC when committed in respect of documents in court proceedings. Impersonation under Section 419 IPC is not covered by this bar. Therefore, a Magistrate has the authority to try and convict a person for impersonation under Section 419 IPC even when committed in relation to court proceedings. The restrictions under Section 352 CrPC do not apply to Section 419 IPC offences once the Section 195 bar is found inapplicable.
On this section: Punishment for cheating by personation - Primary offence for which A1 was convicted; impersonation of S. Mujibur Rahiman and Lokanadham
-
SATPAL SINGH vs STATE OF UT
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The ratio decidendi of this judgment is that criminal conspiracy can be established through circumstantial evidence and the meeting of mind between conspirators can be inferred from their conduct and the circumstances of the case. Specifically, when a person applies for an examination and another person appears in their place, and the first person is the sole beneficiary of the examination outcome, the conspiracy between them can be inferred even if the first person was not physically present at the examination hall. The object of the conspiracy need not be achieved to constitute the offense of criminal conspiracy. However, the offense of impersonation under Section 419 IPC applies only to the person who himself impersonates, not to the person on whose behalf the impersonation is done.
On this section: Impersonation - The court held that Section 419 applies only to the person who himself impersonates, not to the person on whose behalf the impersonation is done. Therefore, the appellant was acquitted under this section as it was Harpal Singh who impersonated, not Satpal Singh.
-
Muhammed Mustafa vs State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An accused person can be permitted to renew their passport during the pendency of criminal proceedings, provided that: (1) the final report has not been filed in the case; (2) appropriate conditions are imposed to ensure the accused's availability for investigation and trial, including furnishing foreign address, contact numbers, and self-addressed stamped envelopes for service of process; and (3) the renewal period is limited (in this case, three years).
On this section: Offences of cheque fraud and forgery under which Crime No. 792 of 2016 was registered against the petitioner
-
Om Parkash Bali vs State Th. I/c Crime Branch
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cross-criminal cases involving the same subject matter, both cases can proceed simultaneously before the same court. The pendency of one case does not prevent framing of charges or proceeding in the other case. An accused cannot rely on Section 476 CrPC or Section 195 CrPC to prevent prosecution for forgery merely because the same cheque has been tendered as evidence in a parallel complaint filed by the accused. Trial courts must not order calling of record of cases without stating reasons and legal provisions, as such orders suffer from non-application of mind and can be quashed by the High Court.
On this section: Cheating by personation. Charges framed against petitioner and co-accused.
-
Ram Bhaj vs State of Haryana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While The Conviction Of An Accused Under Section 465 IPC For Forging Pollution Certificates Must Be Upheld If Supported By Cogent And Convincing Evidence, The Court Possesses Discretionary Authority To Suspend The Remaining Imprisonment Sentence When The Accused Has Already Endured Prolonged Litigation Spanning Nearly Two Decades, Is A First-Time Offender, Serves As The Sole Breadwinner For Aged Parents And Minor Children, And Has Already Undergone Partial Imprisonment. In Such Circumstances, The Ends Of Justice Are Adequately Served By Maintaining The Conviction And Fine While Suspending The Remaining Imprisonment, As Continued Incarceration Would Serve No Useful Purpose.
On this section: Cheating By Personation - Petitioner Was Initially Convicted Under This Section For Misrepresenting His Identity And Authority To Issue Pollution Certificates
-
Vipul Jindal vs State of Haryana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases involving serious allegations of fraud against the government exchequer through creation of fake firms and GST evasion, where material evidence has been recovered based on the accused's disclosure statement, and where a higher court has already dismissed similar bail applications in related cases, bail should be denied to prevent interference with investigation and destruction of evidence.
On this section: Cheating by personation - applicable to the accused's alleged creation of fake firms and forged documents
-
Suraj Jaiswal vs State of U.p.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In bail applications under Section 439 CrPC, the court must balance the right to liberty against the State's interest in ensuring trial completion and witness protection. Bail should be granted when: (1) the accused has cooperated in investigation; (2) the accused has no criminal history; (3) no justifiable cause exists for continued detention; (4) the State has not demonstrated reasonable apprehension of evidence tampering or witness intimidation; and (5) stringent conditions can ensure compliance. The mere pendency of investigation or trial is insufficient to justify indefinite detention.
On this section: Cheating by personation - charge against applicant
-
Rajarshi Guha vs State of Rajasthan through Pp
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Prolonged pre-trial detention of an accused, particularly when the trial is expected to take considerable time and the accused has already spent several months in custody, constitutes a sufficient ground for granting regular bail under Section 439 CrPC, even in the absence of expressed opinion on the merits of the case, provided the Trial Court is satisfied with the bail conditions.
On this section: Charges against the petitioner: Section 419 (Punishment for cheating by personation), Section 420 (Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), Sections 467-468 (Forgery of valuable security and documents), Section 471 (Using as genuine a forged document), Section 120-B (Punishment for criminal conspiracy), Section 75 (Presumption as to documents produced in evidence)
-
Vidhayaram vs State of Rajasthan through P P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When the prosecution fails to effect any recovery from the accused and the complainant cannot identify the accused in an identification parade, the High Court may grant regular bail under Section 439 CrPC, as the weakness of the prosecution's evidence at the bail stage justifies release pending trial.
On this section: Cheating by personation; one of the charges against the petitioner
-
Birju Kumar vs State of Bihar& ANR.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a lower court takes cognizance of a criminal case as a whole, the High Court should not interfere merely because cognizance was taken under one specific section of the IPC instead of multiple sections. The determination of specific offences applicable to the facts is best made at the charge stage, not at the cognizance stage. Therefore, a petition seeking quashing of cognizance on the ground that additional sections should have been included in the cognizance is not maintainable.
On this section: Offence of cheating by personation - the section under which cognizance was taken by the lower court
-
Abduk Khader Shaik vs State of Telangana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused seeks anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C in a case involving economic offences like fraud and forgery, the High Court may, instead of outright dismissal, grant conditional liberty to the accused to voluntarily surrender before the Magistrate and seek regular bail, thereby balancing the accused's right to personal liberty with the interests of justice and ensuring the case proceeds through proper judicial channels with appropriate conditions imposed by the competent Magistrate.
On this section: Cheating by personation - one of the offences alleged against the petitioner
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… He was arrested and sent to judicial custody. He further stated that he was absent from service without obtaining leave for which reason his services were terminated by the Director. The Appellant has also referred to his conviction under Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 by the Judicial Magistrate on 7th January, 1988. He has also filed the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Dungarpur, Rajasthan by which his appeal against the conviction under Section 419 IPC was allowed. The suppression that was alleged against the Appellant at the time of seeking …
-
… He was arrested and sent to judicial custody. He further stated that he was absent from service without obtaining leave for which reason his services were terminated by the Director. The Appellant has also referred to his conviction under Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 by the Judicial Magistrate on 7th January, 1988. He has also filed the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Dungarpur, Rajasthan by which his appeal against the conviction under Section 419 IPC was allowed. The suppression that was alleged against the Appellant at the time of seeking …
-
… &Anr . for the quashing of FIR No. 275 of 2017 under sections 354, 354(A), 354(B), 356, 506, 509 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 registered with Police Station Vivek Vihar. - iii. Crl. M. C. No.4362 of 2019 titled as Shakuntala Goel & Anr. Vs The State &Ors . for the quashing of FIR No. 474 of 2017 under sections 419, 420, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 registered with Police Station Vivek Vihar. I. That it is agreed between the Parties that they shall themselves and / or through their respective counsels submit to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court for quashing of the respective FIR's as prayed in the aforesaid …
Questions about Section 419
What have the courts held on Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code?
Internl. Adv. Res. Cen. for P. M. & N. M. vs Nimra Cerglass (p) Ltd. (22 Sep 2015) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Cheating - cited as offence charged in complaint but ultimately not held applicable as essential ingredients not established. Another 15 judgments on this section are set out below, 4 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2010 to 2024.
How do I find court cases under Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: IPC 419, section 419 IPC, section 419 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 419 420 and ipc 419 and 420 punishment. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 16 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Internl. Adv. Res. Cen. for P. M. & N. M. vs Nimra Cerglass (p) Ltd. (22 Sep 2015).
What should I read with Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 319 (Cheating by personation), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 419, came into force on 01 Jan 1862, having been enacted on 06 Oct 1860. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 499. Defamation1512 words
- 464. Making a false document1223 words
- 300. Murder1172 words
- 378. Theft980 words
- 108. Abettor745 words
- 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property727 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 7b7d4fe6-206b-4e33-81f1-b98b018acaf6). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.