Summary
BNS Section 336 criminalises the making or alteration of any false document or electronic record with fraudulent intent. Punishment scales up to seven years’ imprisonment when the forged item is meant for cheating, and to three years when intended to harm reputation.
With the enactment of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), India’s legislative framework for criminal offenses has undergone a considerable transformation. One of the standout features of this new law is its approach to forgery, codified under Section 336. This article offers a comprehensive overview of this provision, its current relevance, and practical implications—especially for law students preparing for a future in India’s evolving legal landscape.
What is Forgery?
Section 336 of the BNS criminalizes the creation or alteration of false documents or electronic records with dishonest or fraudulent intent. The law recognizes the rapidly increasing reliance on digital documents alongside traditional paper records.
BNS Section 336 Legal Text
(1) Whoever makes any false document or false electronic record or part of a document or electronic record, with intent to cause damage or injury to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery.
(2) Whoever commits forgery shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
(3) Whoever commits forgery, intending that the document or electronic record forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
(4) Whoever commits forgery, intending that the document or electronic record forged shall harm the reputation of any party, or knowing that it is likely to be used for that purpose, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Key Ingredients the Prosecution Must Prove:
- Making or altering a document or electronic record (including signatures).
- Intent: The act must be done dishonestly or fraudulently, intending to injure, defraud, secure property, support a false claim, or harm reputation.
- Capability to deceive: The document must be capable of deceiving others, though actual loss or harm is not a prerequisite.
Penalties and Classification
Section 336 provides for graded penalties, depending on the seriousness and intent behind the forgery:
| Sub-section | Punishment | Cognizable? | Bailable? | Trial Court |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| General Forgery | Up to 2 years or fine or both | Non-cognizable | Bailable | Magistrate 1st Class |
| For Cheating | Up to 7 years and fine | Cognizable | Non-bailable | Magistrate 1st Class |
| For Reputation | Up to 3 years and fine | Cognizable | Bailable | Magistrate 1st Class |
The Digital Leap: Forgery Expands Beyond Paper
Notably, Section 336 brings electronic records and signatures squarely within its ambit. This means that tampering with e-mails, PDFs, blockchain records, or even hacking digital educational mark sheets can amount to forgery. Recognizing this, some practical illustrations include:
- Fabricating electronic sale deeds.
- Altering mark sheets for job applications.
- Creating or manipulating defamatory fake memos online.
Examples of Section 336
1. Property Title Fraud
- Scenario: An individual fabricates a property sale deed with fraudulent signatures to secure a bank loan.
- Legal Impact: This is forgery for the purpose of cheating (Section 336(3)), punishable by up to 7 years’ imprisonment and a fine.
2. Academic Grade Tampering
- Scenario: A student hacks into a university portal, alters their mark-sheet electronically, and submits it for a job application.
- Legal Impact: Making or altering an electronic record for personal gain amounts to forgery with cheating intent (Section 336(3)).
3. Defamatory Memorandum
- Scenario: An employee forges a memo accusing a co-worker of misconduct, intending to tarnish the person’s reputation.
- Legal Impact: This falls under forgery intended to harm reputation (Section 336(4)), with punishment up to 3 years’ imprisonment and a fine.
4. Simple Document Alteration
- Scenario: Someone changes the amount on a paper cheque without authorization, but not to cheat—just to match an invoice, with no fraudulent intent.
- Legal Impact: If there’s no intention to cheat or cause reputational harm, this constitutes general forgery (Section 336(2)), punishable by up to 2 years, a fine, or both.
5. Digital Signature Spoofing
- Scenario: An individual uses someone else’s digital signature to issue a fake contract via email.
- Legal Impact: This is a digital form of forgery under Section 336, since electronic signatures and records are explicitly covered.
6. Fake Electronic Certificates
- Scenario: Creating false digital education certificates for admission or employment.
- Legal Impact: Making or issuing a fake electronic document for wrongful gain is prosecutable under Section 336.
Comparison: IPC vs. BNS on Forgery
Before BNS, the Indian Penal Code (IPC) regulated forgery under Sections 463–469. The BNS enhances these provisions by including advanced digital concepts and clarifying procedures:
| Aspect | IPC | BNS Section 336 |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage | Documents, records | + Electronic records, signatures |
| General Punishment | 2 years/fine | Same |
| For Cheating | 7 years/fine | Same |
| For Reputation | 3 years/fine | Same |
| Cognizability/ Bailability | Mixed (per CrPC) | Streamlined in BNS |
| Terminology | “Document” | Modern & IT-aligned |
Defences and Exceptions
Key defenses include:
- No dishonest or fraudulent intent: Genuine, innocuous errors or authorized corrections are not forgery.
- Consent: Alterations made with due authority steer clear of this section.
- No “false” document: If the document does not purport to be something it isn’t (e.g., clerical corrections with acknowledgment).
Special Points for Law Students and Practitioners
- Charge Framing: Accused may face separate charges based on the nature and intent of the forgery.
- Investigation: Police need warrants for general forgery (non-cognizable cases) but can act swiftly in cases intended for cheating or damaging reputation.
- Electronic Evidence: Must adhere to standards under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (e.g., authenticity of digital records).
Practical Tips: Prevention and Detection
- Always use digital signatures issued under the IT Act on sensitive documents.
- Maintain hash values and audit trails for important e-records.
- Demand verification (QR codes, registry extracts) for crucial documents.
- Report suspicious activities promptly to protect digital evidence.
Conclusion
Section 336 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita marks an evolution in India’s criminal law, aligning it with today’s digital realities. For aspiring lawyers, understanding both the doctrine and technology is now vital—not only for effective litigation but also to promote integrity in transactions. The law offers robust tools, but its effectiveness hinges on vigilance, digital literacy, and proactive engagement by all stakeholders.
