Question: What is the law regarding False Personation? Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [What is the law regarding False Personation?] Answer False personation for the purpose of act or proceeding in a suit or prosecution. Section 205 deals with the offence of False personation for purpose of act or proceeding in suit or… Read More »

Question: What is the law regarding False Personation? Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [What is the law regarding False Personation?] Answer False personation for the purpose of act or proceeding in a suit or prosecution. Section 205 deals with the offence of False personation for purpose of act or proceeding in suit or prosecution: Whoever falsely personates another, and in such assumed character makes any admission or statement, or confesses judgment, or...

Question: What is the law regarding False Personation?

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [What is the law regarding False Personation?]

Answer

  • False personation for the purpose of act or proceeding in a suit or prosecution.

Section 205 deals with the offence of False personation for purpose of act or proceeding in suit or prosecution: Whoever falsely personates another, and in such assumed character makes any admission or statement, or confesses judgment, or causes any process to be issued or becomes bail or security, or does any other act in any suit or criminal prosecution, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

This section makes impersonation an offence. Impersonation means pretending to be another person. For instance, if A pretends to be B, then it means that A is impersonating B.

However, the impersonation should have been done in a civil or criminal proceeding. For the purpose of conviction under this section, it is not necessary that the impersonation should be done fraudulently or dishonestly. Even, if the impersonation is done with the consent of the person impersonated, it will nevertheless be an offence under this section.

There is a difference of opinion between the Calcutta High Court and the Madras High Court as to the question of whether impersonation of a non-existent person is an offence under this section. For instance, A pretends to be B. But there is no such person as B in existence. According to the Calcutta High Court in Bitto Kahar (1862) 1 Ind Jour OS 128(Cal) even impersonation of a fictitious person is an offence under this section. However, the Madras High Court in Kadar Ravuttam (1868) 4 Mad HCR 18 has held that the impersonation should be of a known person and not of an imaginary person.

  • Fraudulent removal or concealment of property to prevent its seizure as forfeited or in execution.

Section 206 deals with the offence of Fraudulent removal or concealment of property to prevent its seizure as forfeited or in execution:

Whoever fraudulently removes, conceals, transfers or delivers to any person any property or any interest therein, intending thereby to prevent that property or interest therein from being taken as a forfeiture or in satisfaction of a fine, under a sentence which has been pronounced, or which he knows to be likely to be pronounced, by a Court of Justice or other competent authority, or from being taken in execution of a decree or order which has been made, or which he knows to be likely to be made by a Court of Justice in a civil suit, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

This section makes punishable fraudulent removal, transfer or delivery of any property with the intention of defeating the outcome of any proceedings of execution or forfeiture orders that may be passed by a court of justice or other competent authority. The section uses the word ‘fraudulently’ which is defined in s 25, IPC. The word ‘fraudulently’ connotes an intention to deceive and to cause injury to another person.

Thus, it is essential that an intention to defraud should be present in order to commit an offence under this section. Further, there must also be an intention to prevent the property or interest therein from being taken as forfeiture of, in satisfaction of a fine or in the execution of a decree or order of a civil court. This particular intention is necessary for the applicability of this section. In order to take cognisance of an offence under this section, it is essential that the court in which the offence is alleged to have been committed should forward a complaint in this regard as per s 195, Crpc.

  • Fraudulent claim to property to prevent seizure etc.

Section 207 deals with the offence of Fraudulent claim to property to prevent its seizure as forfeited or in execution.— Whoever fraudulently accepts, receives or claims any property or any interest therein, knowing that he has no right or rightful claim to such property or interest, or practices any deception touching any right to any property or any interest therein, intending thereby to prevent that property or interest therein from being taken as a forfeiture or in satisfaction of a fine, under a sentence which has been pronounced,

or which he knows to be likely to be pronounced by a Court of Justice or other competent authority, or from being taken in execution of a decree or order which has been made, or which he knows to be likely to be made by a Court of Justice in a civil suit, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

This section deals with making fraudulent claims to property knowing fully well that the person making the claim has no rightful claim to such property. Such claim should be made with the intention to prevent the property from being taken as forfeiture, or in satisfaction of a fine or in the execution of a decree under a sentence of a court. An offence under this section is punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term, which may extend to two years or with a fine or with both.

  • Fraudulently suffering decree for sum not due.

Section 208 deals with the offence committed upon Fraudulently suffering decree for sum not due.— Whoever fraudulently causes or suffers a decree or order to be passed against him at the suit of any person for a sum not due or for a larger sum that is due to such person or for any property or interest in property to which such person is not entitled, or fraudulently causes or suffers a decree or order to be executed against him after it has been satisfied, or for anything in respect of which it has been satisfied, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Section 208 contemplates a situation, wherein a person fraudulently suffers a decree for a sum that is not due. Though the section does not state as to what is the intention or purpose with which the person concerned should suffer the decree, the word ‘fraudulently’ would throw some light on it. The word ‘fraudulently’ denotes that it should be done with the intention to deceive or to cause injury to another person.

Illustration to section 208: A institutes a suit against Z. Z, knowing that A is likely to obtain a decree against him, fraudulently suffers a judgment to pass against him for a larger amount at the suit of B, who has no just claim against him, in order that B, either on his own account or for the benefit of Z, may share in the proceeds of any sale of Z’s property which may be made under A’s decree. Z has committed an offence under this section.

  • Dishonestly making false claims in court.

Section 209 relates to false and fraudulent claims in a court of justice. It states as: Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly, or with intent to injure or annoy any person, makes in a Court of Justice any claim which he knows to be false, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, and shall also be liable to fine.

The person making the claim should do so fraudulently or dishonestly and with an intention to injure or annoy any person. The person making the claim should know that the claim made is false. It is not sufficient for the prosecution to merely establish that the accused had a reasonable belief that it is false. It should go a step forward and prove decisively that the accused knew fully well that the claim made by him was false.

A mere dismissal of a suit on merits will not amount to a false claim, unless there is a clear, finding by the court that the claim was false and was instituted with the intention to injure the defendant. For a court to take cognisance of an offence under this section, it is essential that the court in whose proceedings the offence has been committed should forward a complaint in this regard under s 195, Crpc.

  • Fraudulently obtaining decree for sum not due.

Section 210 deals with the offence committed upon Fraudulently obtaining decree for sum not due.— Whoever fraudulently obtains a decree or order against any person for a sum not due or for a larger sum than is due or for any property or interest in property to which he is not entitled, or fraudulently causes a decree or order to be executed against any person after it has been satisfied or for anything in respect of which it has been satisfied, or fraudulently suffers or permits any such act to be done in his name, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

This section punishes a plaintiff for obtaining a decree for sum not due, whereas s 208 punishes a defendant for fraudulently suffering a decree for a sum not due. This section will apply only if the prosecution is able to establish a fraudulent or criminal intent on the part of the plaintiff and not a bona fide mistake. Like in earlier sections, a prosecution for an offence under this section requires a complaint to be made by the court, in which or in relation to any proceeding in which such proceeding is alleged to be committed.

  • False charge of offence made with intent to injury.

Section 211 deals with the offence committed upon False charge of offence made with intent to injury.— Whoever, with intent to cause injury to any person, institutes or causes to be instituted any criminal proceeding against that person, or falsely charges any person with having committed an offence, knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for such proceeding or charge against that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both;

and if such criminal proceeding is instituted on a false charge of an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for seven years or upwards, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.

This provision deals with two distinct offences:

(1) actually instituting or causing to be instituted a false criminal proceeding against a person, and

(2) levelling a false charge against a person. The former assumes the latter, but the latter offence may be committed even if no criminal proceedings follow. To constitute an offence under this section, it must be established that the accused:

  1. instituted or caused to be instituted a criminal proceeding against a person;
  2. falsely charged a person with having committed an offence;
  3. did so with the intent to cause injury to such person, and
  4. did so knowing that there was no just or lawful ground for such proceeding or charge

The false charge need not necessarily be an offence under IPC, but can also be under a special or local law. The false charge given should be with the intention to cause injury to a particular person. Thus, giving a complaint to the police about the theft of property by a person without naming or indicating any particular person as being the offender, will not amount to an offence under this section, even if the complaint made is a false one as held in Ram Renuchattoraj v. Emperor AIR 1941 Cal 288.


Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

  1. IPC Mains Questions Series Part I: Important Questions
  2. IPC Mains Questions Series Part II: Important Questions
  3. IPC Mains Questions Series Part III: Important Questions
  4. IPC Mains Questions Series Part IV: Important Questions
  5. IPC Mains Questions Series Part V: Important Questions
  6. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VI: Important Questions
  7. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VII: Important Questions
  8. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VIII: Important Questions
  9. IPC Mains Questions Series Part IX: Important Questions
  10. IPC Mains Questions Series Part X: Important Questions
Updated On 2021-07-17T17:39:39+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story