BNS Section 335: Making a False Document (IPC 464 Mapping) (2026)

Explainer · Criminal Law · BNS

Updated for 2026 · Claw Editorial

Section 335 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) defines when a person is said to make a "false document" or a "false electronic record". It replaced Section 464 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) from 1 July 2024. This is the building block of forgery. Making a false document is one of the ingredients the prosecution must prove before an act counts as forgery. Section 335 itself sets no punishment; the offence of forgery is punished separately. This explainer sets out what Section 335 covers, how it maps to the old law, and how it fits with forgery. Last verified October 2026.

01Why the section number matters now

Since 1 July 2024 the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). The forgery provisions moved. The definition of "making a false document", which lawyers knew as Section 464 of the IPC, is now Section 335 of the BNS.

This matters in practice. Any charge of forgery under the BNS is read with Section 335, because you cannot have forgery without a false document. An older matter keeps its IPC numbers, because the law that applies is the law on the date of the offence.

02What Section 335 covers

Section 335 of the BNS tells you when a document or an electronic record is "false". It does not create an offence on its own. It supplies the definition that the offence of forgery depends on.

The section extends in plain terms to electronic records and electronic signatures, which matters for modern fraud. It also carries explanations and illustrations, including documents made in the name of a fictitious or dead person.

03The three ways a document becomes false

Under Section 335, a person makes a false document or false electronic record when, dishonestly or fraudulently, they do any of the following.

• Make, sign, seal or execute a document or part of a document, or make or transmit an electronic record, or affix an electronic signature, with the intent to make it appear that it was made by a person who did not make it, or at a time or place at which it was not made.
• Alter a document or electronic record in a material part, without lawful authority, after it has been made or executed.
• Cause a person to sign, seal, execute or alter a document or electronic record when that person does not know the contents or the nature of the change, due to unsoundness of mind, intoxication, or deception.

In each case the dishonest or fraudulent intent is essential. An honest change, or one made with lawful authority, is not covered.

04Old to new: IPC 464 to BNS 335

Section 464 of the IPC is now Section 335 of the BNS. The definition is carried over, with the electronic-record language retained and modernised.

Note the common mix-up: "forgery" is defined in old Section 463 (now Section 336 of the BNS), while "making a false document" is old Section 464 (now Section 335). Section 335 is the ingredient; Section 336 is the offence.

05How it fits with forgery and punishment

Section 335 does not punish anything by itself. To make out forgery, the prosecution shows, first, that a false document was made within the meaning of Section 335, and second, that it was made for one of the purposes that turn a false document into forgery.

The sentence then comes from the forgery provision that fits the facts. Ordinary forgery is punished under Section 336 of the BNS, while graver forms, such as forging a court record, a valuable security or a will, carry heavier punishment under their own sections.

06What changed from the old law

For this definition, the change is mainly the number. The three ways a document becomes false, and the central dishonest or fraudulent intent, are carried over from Section 464 of the IPC. So the large body of case law on Section 464 still guides how Section 335 is read.

The electronic-record and electronic-signature language, already present in the amended IPC, continues in Section 335, which keeps the definition fit for digital documents.

07Where Claw fits

Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals.

A dispute over whether a document is false often runs on two tracks at once, a criminal trial and a civil suit over the same instrument, with appeals on top. Claw brings the record together, letting you search cases, orders and hearing dates across 9,102 courts, benches and forums to see how judges have applied the old Section 464 and the new Section 335 on what makes a document false. The searchable set runs past 30 crore judgments, reaches back to the Supreme Court of 1950 and the High Courts of 1990, and answers most searches in under five seconds; a live matter can be followed by party or advocate name.

Claw does not train its AI models on the documents you upload. Create a free Claw account to trace how courts have read Section 335 and the old Section 464, and to follow a matter by party or advocate name. For research across the wider law, see case search across Indian courts.

08Sources and further reading

• India Code (official text of the BNS, 2023): indiacode.nic.in
• PRS Legislative Research (BNS overview and IPC comparison): prsindia.org
• Section 335, BNS (bare text): devgan.in
• Claw: clawlaw.in

This explainer is general information, not legal advice. The law changes through amendments and judgments, so check the current text and take advice from counsel before you act.

09Frequently asked questions