Section 322 punishes a person who dishonestly or fraudulently signs, executes or becomes a party to a deed or instrument that purports to transfer property (or any interest in it) or to subject it to a charge, where the deed contains a false statement about the consideration for the transfer or charge, or about the person or persons for whose use or benefit it is really meant to operate. The punishment is imprisonment of up to three years, or fine, or both — up from two years under IPC Section 423.
Verified against the National Crime Records Bureau's official BNS–IPC concordance (Sankalan Portal) and cross-checked directly against the bare text of both Acts. Section 322 carries the “(Change)” marker in the concordance and corresponds to one section of the old Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 423). Comparing the two statutory texts, the section is Substantively changed:
| BNS section | IPC, 1860 equivalent | Category |
|---|---|---|
| 322 | S.423 “Dishonest or fraudulent execution of deed of transfer containing false statement of consideration” | Substantively changed |
A word-by-word comparison of BNS Section 322 with IPC Section 423 shows one difference and no others: the maximum term of imprisonment. IPC Section 423 provided imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or fine, or both; BNS Section 322 provides imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or fine, or both. The description of the offence — the dishonest or fraudulent signing, executing or becoming a party to the deed or instrument, what it purports to do, and the two kinds of false statement — is word for word the same, and so is the marginal heading.
Whoever dishonestly or fraudulently signs, executes or becomes a party to any deed or instrument which purports to transfer or subject to any charge any property, or any interest therein, and which contains any false statement relating to the consideration for such transfer or charge, or relating to the person or persons for whose use or benefit it is really intended to operate, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Source: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 45 of 2023), as published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary.
Section 322 is about the paperwork of a transfer. Its ingredients are as follows. First, the accused must act dishonestly or fraudulently, as defined in Section 2(7) and Section 2(9). Second, he must sign, execute or become a party to a deed or instrument; the three verbs are alternatives, so the section is not confined to the person who is giving up the property, and each person who dishonestly or fraudulently signs, executes or becomes a party to the deed is within its words. Third, the deed or instrument must be one that purports to transfer, or to subject to any charge, any property or any interest in it; the section speaks of what the document purports to do. Fourth, the deed or instrument must contain a false statement of one of two kinds, joined by “or”: a false statement relating to the consideration for the transfer or charge, or a false statement relating to the person or persons for whose use or benefit the deed is really intended to operate.
Note that the marginal heading of the section mentions only a false statement of consideration, while the words of the section also refer to a false statement about the person or persons for whose use or benefit the deed is really intended to operate. Section 2 does not define “deed”, “instrument”, “consideration” or “charge” (BNSS Section 2(1)(f) defines “charge”, but only for the purposes of that Sanhita; Section 2’s definition of “document” in clause (8) is a separate, wide definition covering any matter expressed or described upon any substance by letters, figures or marks, including electronic and digital record, intended to be used or which may be used as evidence; Section 322 uses the words “deed or instrument”). As everyday examples, a false statement relating to consideration might be something like a recital that a sum was paid as the price when it was not paid, or when a different sum was in truth agreed; and a false statement relating to the person for whose use or benefit the deed is really intended to operate might be a statement naming one beneficiary when the deed is really meant to benefit someone else. These are everyday examples offered only to make the words concrete; the words of the section are what count.
The section should be distinguished from its neighbours. Section 320 concerns removing, concealing, delivering or transferring property to defeat creditors, and requires an intention or knowledge about distribution among creditors; Section 322 has no such requirement in its words, and looks instead to the document and what it falsely states. Section 321 concerns preventing a debt or demand from being made available for payment of debts. Section 323 concerns dishonest or fraudulent concealment or removal of property, assisting in it, and releasing a demand or claim. Separately, Section 318 (cheating) and the offences relating to documents in Chapter XVIII (for example Sections 335 and 336) have their own ingredients; the words of Section 322 do not mention that anyone was deceived into parting with property, or that a document was forged. They refer to the dishonest or fraudulent signing, execution or joining, in respect of a deed or instrument of the kind described that contains the false statement.
The punishment is imprisonment of either description (rigorous or simple, as listed in Section 4(c)) for a term which may extend to three years, or fine, or both, with no minimum term. This is the point at which the Sanhita differs from IPC Section 423: the maximum term rises from two years to three, and no other word of the section changed. The BNSS First Schedule lists Section 322 as non-cognizable (BNSS Section 2(1)(o): a police officer has no authority to arrest without warrant), bailable, and triable by any Magistrate. Under BNSS Section 359(1) it is compoundable by the person affected thereby, without the permission of the Court; Section 359 sets further conditions on compounding that should be read in full before it is relied on in any real case.
Imprisonment of either description (simple or rigorous) for a term which may extend to three years, or fine, or both. The section sets no minimum term.
Under the First Schedule to the BNSS it is non-cognizable and bailable, and triable by any Magistrate. Under BNSS Section 359(1) it is compoundable by the person affected thereby, without the permission of the Court, subject to the other conditions of Section 359.
No. The heading mentions consideration, but the words of the section cover two kinds of false statement: one relating to the consideration for the transfer or charge, and one relating to the person or persons for whose use or benefit the deed is really intended to operate.
The section applies to a person who dishonestly or fraudulently signs, executes or becomes a party to the deed or instrument. It is not limited to the person who transfers the property.
The words are “which purports to transfer or subject to any charge” any property or any interest in it; they do not say that the deed must be effective to do so.
Only the maximum term of imprisonment: two years under IPC Section 423, three years under Section 322. The rest of the wording and the marginal heading are the same.