IPC Section 263: Erasing a Used Stamp Mark | Current BNS Section 185
Section 263 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 punished fraudulent erasure of a mark showing that a Government revenue stamp had already been used, as well as specified knowing possession, sale or disposal of such stamps. The corresponding provision for conduct from 1 July 2024 is Section 185 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
What did IPC Section 263 provide?
IPC Section 263 was titled Erasure of mark denoting that stamp has been used. Its statutory provision stated:
Whoever, fraudulently or with intent to cause loss to Government, erases or removes from a stamp issued by Government for the purpose of revenue, any mark, put or impressed upon such stamp for the purpose of denoting that the same has been used, or knowingly has in his possession or sells or disposes of any such stamp from which such mark has been erased or removed, or sells or disposes of any such stamp which he knows to have been used, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Former punishment: imprisonment of either description (simple or rigorous) for up to three years, or a fine, or both. The provision targeted dishonest interference with cancellation or use marks on Government revenue stamps and related dealings in those stamps.
Essential ingredients of IPC Section 263
The provision addressed several forms of conduct:
- Erasure or removal: removing a mark placed on a Government revenue stamp to show it had already been used, with fraudulent intent or intent to cause Government loss.
- Knowing possession: possessing a stamp while knowing that its use mark had been erased or removed.
- Knowing sale or disposal: selling or otherwise disposing of a stamp with an erased or removed use mark, or a stamp known to have already been used.
- Government revenue stamp: the stamp must be one issued by Government for revenue purposes, not an unrelated private label.
The statutory mental element differs according to the alleged act. Fraudulent intent or intent to cause Government loss is expressly relevant to erasing or removing the mark; knowledge is expressly relevant to the specified possession, sale and disposal alternatives. Mere innocent handling does not automatically establish every ingredient.
Current law: BNS Section 185
Section 185 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, titled Erasure of mark denoting that stamp has been used, addresses the same central misconduct: fraudulent erasure or removal of a mark indicating use of a Government revenue stamp, and specified knowing possession, sale or disposal of such stamps.
Punishment: imprisonment of either description for a term extending up to three years, or fine, or both. A court must evaluate the particular statutory alternative, the evidence of knowledge or intent, and the date of the alleged conduct.
The BNS did not merely renumber the IPC across the board; readers should use the operative text of Section 185 for conduct occurring after its commencement and consider applicable transitional provisions for earlier conduct.
Difference between erasing a stamp mark and reusing a stamp
| Provision | Prohibited conduct | Punishment |
|---|---|---|
| Former IPC Section 263 | Erasing a used-stamp mark; specified knowing possession, sale or disposal | Up to 3 years, or fine, or both |
| Current BNS Section 185 | Corresponding used-stamp mark erasure and dealing offences | Up to 3 years, or fine, or both |
| Former IPC Section 262 / current BNS Section 184 | Fraudulent use of a Government revenue stamp known to have already been used | Up to 2 years, or fine, or both |
| Former IPC Section 261 / current BNS Section 183 | Fraudulent removal of writing or of a used stamp from a document to enable reuse | Up to 3 years, or fine, or both |
Illustrative example
A person intentionally removes a cancellation mark from a previously used Government revenue stamp so that it appears unused. That act may attract the provision on erasure of a use mark. If another person knowingly sells that altered stamp, the separate dealing limb may be relevant. By contrast, an accidental mark on a stamp or innocent possession without the required knowledge does not by itself establish the offence.
Related reading: IPC Section 261 and IPC Section 262.
Frequently asked questions
Is IPC Section 263 still in force?
The IPC was replaced by the BNS with effect from 1 July 2024. IPC Section 263 may still matter for offences committed before that date, subject to applicable savings provisions. BNS Section 185 addresses corresponding later conduct.
What is the maximum punishment for removing a used-stamp mark?
Under former IPC Section 263 and current BNS Section 185, the punishment can extend to three years of imprisonment, or a fine, or both.
Is possessing a stamp with an erased cancellation mark always an offence?
No. The statutory possession limb requires knowledge that the relevant mark has been erased or removed. Whether that knowledge is established depends on the evidence.
Does this cover all stamps?
The provision specifically concerns stamps issued by Government for revenue purposes. Different rules may apply to other stamps, documents or electronic records.
Official legislation and references
- India Code: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (official Act PDF), Section 185
- India Code: Indian Penal Code, 1860 and central legislation
- Indian Penal Code: sections, definitions and punishments
This article is general legal information, not advice on a specific case. The date of the alleged conduct and the precise statutory ingredients determine the applicable provision.