As long as there is a paper trail like a bill of sale, a claim of ownership cannot be questioned.

Courts look behind the paperwork; a fraudulent or backdated ownership claim made to defeat a decree is punishable regardless of documentation.

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 244

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 practises 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 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 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.§

Why this exists

This is the counterpart to Section 243: while that section punishes the debtor who hides their own property, this provision (earlier Section 207 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860) punishes anyone who falsely claims ownership of that property to help shield it from seizure, closing the loop on both sides of a sham transfer.

Common misconceptions

Myth: As long as there is a paper trail like a bill of sale, a claim of ownership cannot be questioned.
Fact: Courts look behind the paperwork; a fraudulent or backdated ownership claim made to defeat a decree is punishable regardless of documentation.