Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVIII: Of Offences Relating to Documents and to Property Marks
Section 464: Making a false document
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
In plain words
A person makes a false document or electronic record if they dishonestly or fraudulently make, sign, seal or execute a document, make or transmit an electronic record, affix an electronic signature, or make a mark of execution or authenticity, intending it to be believed that it was made by or with the authority of someone who they know did not make or authorise it.
- The official text shown here is incomplete. The full section also covers altering a document after it was made, and getting someone to sign or alter a document when they cannot understand it because of unsoundness of mind, intoxication or deception.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
[A person is said to make a false document or false electronic record— First.—Who dishonestly or fraudulently—
(a) makes, signs, seals or executes a document or part of a document;
(b) makes or transmits any electronic record or part of any electronic record;
(c) affixes any [electronic signature] on any electronic record;
(d) makes any mark denoting the execution of a document or the authenticity of the [electronic signature], with the intention of causing it to be believed that such document or part of document, electronic record or [electronic signature] was made, signed, sealed, executed, transmitted or affixed by or by the authority of a person by whom or by whose authority he knows that it was not made, singed, sealed, executed or affixed; or
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 464
-
Kathyayini v. Sidharth P.S. Reddy & Ors.
The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against respondent nos.1 and 2 in two complaint cases whereby they were charged for offences punishable u/ss.120B, 415, 420 r/w. s.34 of Penal Code, 1860. Whether a prima…
-
Ramachandraiah & Anr. v. M. Manjula & Ors.
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court was justified in directing for investigation by the CBI.
- Shri Sukhbir Singh Badal v. Balwant Singh Khera
- M/S Bandekar Brothers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr v. Prasad Vassudev Keni, Etc. Etc
- Chilakamarthi Venkateswarlu & Anr.V. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
- Sheila Sebastian v. R. Jawaharaj & Anr. Etc.
- Sonu Gupta v. Deepak Gupta & Ors.
- Sunil v. Sakshi @ Shweta & Anr.
- Satish Mehra v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr.
- The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Vimal Kumar Surana and Another
- Parminder Kaur v. State of U.P.
- Md. Ibrahim & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Anr.
- Mir Nagvi Askari v. C. B. I.
- Devendra &Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr.
- State of U.P. v. Paras Nath Singh
- Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr
- State of Punjab and Ors. v. M/S. Amritsar Beverages Ltd. and Ors.
- Iqbal Singh Marwah v. Meenakshi Etc.
- Ram Narain Popli v. Central Bureau of Investigation
- State of U.P. v. Ranjit Singh
- Indian Bank v. M/S. Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd.
- Central Bureau of Investigation, Spe, Siu (X), New Delhi v. Duncans Agro Industries Ltd. Calcutta