Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Section 228
Fabricating false evidence
Whoever causes any circumstance to exist or makes any false entry in any book or record, or electronic record or makes any document or electronic record containing a false statement, intending that such circumstance, false entry or false statement may appear in evidence in a judicial proceeding, or in a proceeding taken by law before a public servant as such, or before an arbitrator, and that such circumstance, false entry or false statement, so appearing in evidence, may cause any person who in such proceeding is to form an opinion upon the evidence, to entertain an erroneous opinion touching any point material to the result of such proceeding is said “to fabricate false evidence”. Illustrations.
(a) A puts jewels into a box belonging to Z, with the intention that they may be found in that box, and that this circumstance may cause Z to be convicted of theft. A has fabricated false evidence.
(b) A makes a false entry in his shop-book for the purpose of using it as corroborative evidence in a Court. A has fabricated false evidence.
(c) A, with the intention of causing Z to be convicted of a criminal conspiracy, writes a letter in imitation of Z’s handwriting, purporting to be addressed to an accomplice in such criminal conspiracy, and puts the letter in a place which he knows that the officers of the police are likely to search. A has fabricated false evidence.
Why this exists
This provision (carried over in substance from Section 192 of the old Indian Penal Code) exists to protect the integrity of judicial and quasi-judicial processes. Courts, tribunals, and arbitrators rely on evidence to reach fair decisions. If people could plant fake clues, forge documents, or falsify records without consequence, the entire system of justice would collapse, since decision-makers could be manipulated into punishing the innocent or letting the guilty go free. The law criminalizes the *creation* of such false evidence, separate from actually *using* it in court, recognizing that the harm begins the moment someone sets up a deception meant to mislead a legal process.
How courts read it
Under the predecessor provision (IPC Section 192), Indian courts have consistently held that the offence is complete once the false circumstance, entry, or document is created with the required fraudulent intent—it is not necessary that the fabricated evidence actually be used or produced in the proceeding. Courts have emphasized that intention is central: the prosecution must show the accused intended the fabricated material to appear as evidence and to mislead the fact-finder on a point material to the case's outcome. Mere carelessness or an honest mistake in record-keeping does not amount to fabrication.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: You're only guilty if the fake evidence is actually shown in court.
Fact: The offence is complete once the false evidence is created with the intention to mislead a legal proceeding, even if it's never actually presented in court. - Myth: This only applies to physical objects like planted items.
Fact: It also covers false entries in books, records, electronic records, and documents—digital fabrication counts just as much as physical planting. - Myth: A genuine mistake in record-keeping counts as fabrication.
Fact: The law requires intentional deception meant to mislead a legal proceeding; honest errors without that intent are not covered.