Making a false mark upon any receptacle containing goods
Section 487 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with making a false mark upon any receptacle containing goods. Whoever makes any false mark upon any case, package or other receptacle containing goods, in a manner reasonably calculated to cause any public servant or any other person to believe that such receptacle contains goods which it does not contain or that it does not contain goods which it does contain 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 Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and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 makes any false mark upon any case, package or other receptacle containing goods, in a manner reasonably calculated to cause any public servant or any other person to believe that such receptacle contains goods which it does not contain or that it does not contain goods which it does contain, or that the goods contained in such receptacle are of a nature or quality different from the real nature or quality thereof, shall, unless he proves that he acted without intent to defraud, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 487, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 350 Making a false mark upon any receptacle containing goods Text carried over almost unchanged 95%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
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.
-
Anilbhai Nayaka vs Union Of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Even though Section 37 of the NDPS Act (twin test for bail) may not strictly apply to controlled substances as opposed to narcotic drugs, the non-applicability of this section does not automatically entitle an accused to bail. Courts retain discretion to refuse bail in controlled substance cases based on: (1) seizure of huge quantity of controlled substance with potential for manufacturing narcotic drugs, (2) presence of incriminating material establishing active participation in drug trafficking, (3) likelihood of accused absconding or becoming unavailable for trial, particularly when accused are non-residents of the trial jurisdiction, and (4) transnational/international aspects of the drug trafficking operation. The burden remains on the accused to satisfy the court that bail should be granted, and in cases involving serious drug trafficking with international linkage, courts should exercise caution in granting bail.
On this section: Forgery of valuable security. Applied to charges related to misbranding of controlled substances as ordinary medicines.
-
Dongri Police stn. vs Atik Ahmed Iliyas Ahmed Shaikh USec. 483, 485, 486 IPC
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
To secure conviction under Sections 483, 485, 486, 487 of IPC and Sections 103, 104 of Trade Mark Act and Section 63 of Copyright Act, the prosecution must prove: (1) that the trade mark or copyright is registered with statutory authorities; (2) that the property was properly seized from the accused with adherence to procedural requirements including panch witness corroboration and accused's signature on seizure memo; (3) that the accused was present and identified at the time of seizure; (4) that the property was properly labeled, numbered and sealed; (5) that specific individuals were deceived and induced to purchase duplicate products; and (6) that the accused was involved in making or possessing counterfeit marks or instruments. Failure to prove any of these essential ingredients results in acquittal.
On this section: Making false mark on packages - Court found no evidence that accused caused mark on bundles resembling Tanmay Bidi trade mark
-
Most.lakhpatiya Devi vs State of Bihar
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases involving elderly female accused persons charged with fraud-related offenses, where the complainant's actual loss or cheating is disputed or not clearly established, bail may be granted on compassionate grounds with appropriate conditions including bail bond and sureties, subject to compliance with Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
On this section: Wrongful loss - Alleged wrongful loss caused by the double sale
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.
Questions about Section 487
What have the courts held on Section 487 of the Indian Penal Code?
Anilbhai Nayaka vs Union Of India (24 Jul 2025) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Forgery of valuable security. Applied to charges related to misbranding of controlled substances as ordinary medicines. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2010 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 487 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 487, section 487 IPC, section 487 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 487 meaning and 487 ipc punishment. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Anilbhai Nayaka vs Union Of India (24 Jul 2025).
What should I read with Section 487 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
2 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 350 (Making a false mark upon any receptacle containing goods), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 487 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 487 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 487, 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.