Indian criminal law guide | Updated October 2026
IPC Section 218 and BNS Section 256: Public Servant Framing an Incorrect Record
Section 218 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 punished a public servant who knowingly prepared an incorrect official record with specified harmful or protective intentions. Its corresponding provision under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is Section 256.
1. Which law applies?
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024 and replaced the IPC prospectively, subject to statutory savings and transitional provisions. IPC Section 218 remains relevant to conduct occurring before commencement; BNS Section 256 governs corresponding conduct after commencement. The date of the alleged act and the applicable savings provisions should be examined in each case.
2. Text and meaning of IPC Section 218
The original provision concerns a public servant responsible for preparing a record or other writing who knowingly frames it incorrectly, with the intention or knowledge that this may cause loss or injury, shield a person from lawful punishment, or protect property from lawful forfeiture or charge.
Statutory wording of Section 218 IPC
Whoever, being a public servant, and being as such public servant, charged with the preparation of any record or other writing, frames that record or writing in a manner which he knows to be incorrect, with intent to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, loss or injury to the public or to any person, or with intent thereby to save, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby save, any person from legal punishment, or with intent to save, or knowing that he is likely thereby to save, any property from forfeiture or other charge to which it is liable by law, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
3. BNS Section 256: Current corresponding law
Section 256 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, titled "Public servant framing incorrect record or writing with intent to save person from punishment or property from forfeiture", substantially carries forward the language and punishment of IPC Section 218. It covers deliberate falsification by a public servant charged with making a record, where the specified intent or knowledge is present.
Read the official BNS text on India Code and the NCRB IPC-to-BNS correspondence table.
4. Essential ingredients of the offence
- Status: The accused must be a public servant.
- Official responsibility: The person must be charged, in that capacity, with preparing a record or writing.
- Knowing inaccuracy: The record or writing must be framed in a manner the public servant knows is incorrect.
- Required intent or knowledge: The act must be intended, or known to be likely, to cause loss or injury to the public or a person, save someone from legal punishment, or protect property from lawful forfeiture or another charge.
A clerical mistake, without the required knowledge and mental element, does not by itself establish this offence. Whether the ingredients are proved depends on the evidence.
5. Punishment and classification
| Question | Position under BNS Section 256 |
|---|---|
| Punishment | Imprisonment of either description up to 3 years, or fine, or both |
| Cognizable? | Yes |
| Bailable? | Yes |
| Court competent to try | Magistrate of the first class |
Classification follows the First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. See the official NCRB schedule.
6. Illustrative situations
Depending on proof of the statutory ingredients, the section may be relevant where a public servant knowingly falsifies an official register to conceal an offence, alters a record to shield a person from punishment, or prepares a false record to prevent property from being forfeited. These examples are illustrative, not automatic findings of guilt.
7. Related provisions
BNS Section 255 concerns a public servant disobeying a direction of law with intent to save a person from punishment or property from forfeiture. BNS Section 257 concerns a public servant in a judicial proceeding corruptly or maliciously making a report, order, verdict or decision known to be contrary to law. BNS Section 201 concerns a public servant framing an incorrect document with intent to cause injury. Each has distinct ingredients.
8. IPC Section 218 case-law references
The earlier webpage listed the following historical citations. They are preserved for research, but the case names, report details and precise holdings should be verified from authoritative law reports before citation in court:
- Raghubansh Lal (1957) 1 All 368
- Nand Kishore (1897) 19 All 305
- Hurdat Surana (1867) 8 WR (Cr.) 68
- Maulad Ahmad (1964) 2 Cr LJ 71 (SC)
- Deodhar Singh (1899) 27 Cal 144
Older IPC judgments may remain relevant to interpreting substantially similar BNS wording, subject to subsequent judicial developments and the facts of each case.
9. Frequently asked questions
Is IPC Section 218 still applicable?
It remains relevant to offences allegedly committed before the commencement of the BNS, subject to repeal and savings provisions. The corresponding current offence is BNS Section 256.
Is BNS Section 256 bailable?
Yes. The BNSS First Schedule classifies it as bailable and cognizable.
What is the maximum sentence?
Imprisonment of either description for up to three years, or fine, or both.
Does every incorrect official record amount to this offence?
No. The prosecution must establish the required official duty, knowing inaccuracy and specified intent or knowledge.
This article is general legal information, not advice on a particular case. Verify current legislation, procedural requirements and relevant judgments before taking action.