Section 347 punishes counterfeiting a property mark. Sub-section (1) covers counterfeiting a property mark used by any other person (imprisonment of up to two years, or fine, or both). Sub-section (2) covers counterfeiting a property mark used by a public servant, or a mark a public servant uses to denote manufacture, quality, passage through an office or exemption, or knowingly using such a counterfeit mark as genuine (imprisonment of up to three years, and the offender is also liable to fine). The two sub-sections repeat IPC Sections 483 and 484 word for word.
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 347 is not marked “Change” in the concordance, but the section as a whole consolidates two separate provisions of the old Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 483 and 484), which now appear as its two sub-sections. Each sub-section maps one-to-one to a single IPC section and repeats its wording, so each is classed Exact:
| BNS section | IPC, 1860 equivalent | Category |
|---|---|---|
| 347(1) | S.483 “Counterfeiting a property mark used by another” | Exact |
| 347(2) | S.484 “Counterfeiting a mark used by a public servant” | Exact |
A word-by-word comparison of each BNS sub-section with its IPC counterpart shows no difference in wording: 347(1) with IPC Section 483 (imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or fine, or both) and 347(2) with IPC Section 484 (imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and also liable to fine). The comparison is made with the IPC provisions as amended: the IPC text shows that words about trade marks were omitted from IPC Section 483 in 1959, and after that omission it reads the same as BNS 347(1). The concordance pairs the section heading with IPC Section 483 and places sub-section (2) against IPC Section 484.
(1) Whoever counterfeits any property mark used by any other person shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
(2) Whoever counterfeits any property mark used by a public servant, or any mark used by a public servant to denote that any property has been manufactured by a particular person or at a particular time or place, or that the property is of a particular quality or has passed through a particular office, or that it is entitled to any exemption, or uses as genuine any such mark knowing the same to be counterfeit, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Source: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 45 of 2023), as published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary.
Sub-section (1) punishes a person who counterfeits any property mark used by any other person. A property mark is a mark used for denoting that movable property belongs to a particular person (Section 345(1)). To counterfeit has its own definition in Section 2(4): a person counterfeits who causes one thing to resemble another thing, intending by means of that resemblance to practise deception, or knowing it to be likely that deception will thereby be practised. Two Explanations to that definition matter here. Explanation 1 says it is not essential to counterfeiting that the imitation should be exact. Explanation 2 says that when a person causes one thing to resemble another, and the resemblance is such that a person might be deceived by it, it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that he intended by means of that resemblance to practise deception or knew it to be likely that deception would thereby be practised.
The mark counterfeited must be one used by “any other person”, that is, someone other than the counterfeiter. The sub-section's wording is about the act of counterfeiting; it does not add words requiring that the counterfeit mark was then put on goods or that anyone was in fact deceived. Related acts are dealt with in other sections: making or possessing an instrument for counterfeiting a property mark is in Section 348, and selling goods marked with a counterfeit property mark is in Section 349. The punishment is imprisonment of either description (simple or rigorous) for a term which may extend to two years, or fine, or both. Under the BNSS First Schedule the offence is non-cognizable and bailable and is triable by any Magistrate, and BNSS Section 359(1) lists it among the offences that may be compounded without the Court's permission, by the person to whom loss or injury is caused by such use.
Sub-section (2) is the more serious tier, and it has three alternative limbs. The first is counterfeiting any property mark used by a public servant. The second is counterfeiting any mark used by a public servant to denote that any property has been manufactured by a particular person or at a particular time or place, or that the property is of a particular quality or has passed through a particular office, or that it is entitled to any exemption; a mark of this kind is described by what it denotes (manufacture, quality, passage through an office or exemption), not by ownership. The third is using as genuine any such mark, knowing the same to be counterfeit, so a person who did not make the counterfeit can still be caught if he knowingly uses it as genuine. “Public servant” is defined in Section 2(28); among the descriptions listed there, clause (k)(i) covers every person in the service or pay of the Government.
Sub-section (2) differs from sub-section (1) in its punishment as well as in the marks it protects. Sub-section (1) allows imprisonment of either description for up to two years, or fine, or both. Sub-section (2) allows imprisonment of either description for up to three years, and the offender is also liable to fine, so fine is added to imprisonment rather than offered as an alternative to it. Under the BNSS First Schedule the offence at sub-section (2) is non-cognizable and bailable and is triable by a Magistrate of the first class; it does not appear in either compounding table of BNSS Section 359, so, unlike sub-section (1), it is not compoundable under that section. The definition of “counterfeit” in Section 2(4), with its two Explanations, applies here in the same way as in sub-section (1). A property mark used by a public servant is also, in the words of sub-section (1), a property mark used by “any other person”; as worded, the two sub-sections appear to overlap on that point, and sub-section (2) carries the higher punishment.
Under sub-section (1), imprisonment of either description (simple or rigorous) for a term which may extend to two years, or fine, or both. Under sub-section (2), imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and the offender is also liable to fine. The section does not fix the amount of the fine.
Under the First Schedule to the BNSS both sub-sections are non-cognizable and bailable. Sub-section (1) is triable by any Magistrate and sub-section (2) by a Magistrate of the first class.
Sub-section (1) can be compounded, without the permission of the Court, by the person to whom loss or injury is caused by such use (BNSS Section 359(1)). Sub-section (2) appears in neither compounding table of BNSS Section 359 and is not compoundable.
Section 2(4) says a person counterfeits who causes one thing to resemble another thing, intending by means of that resemblance to practise deception, or knowing it to be likely that deception will thereby be practised. It is not essential that the imitation should be exact.
Sub-section (1) protects a property mark used by any other person. Sub-section (2) protects a property mark used by a public servant and also marks a public servant uses to show manufacture, quality, passage through an office or exemption, and it covers knowingly using such a counterfeit mark as genuine. The punishment under sub-section (2) is higher.
No. Sub-sections (1) and (2) are word-for-word the same as IPC Sections 483 and 484 respectively, comparing with those sections as amended.