Section 348 punishes a person who makes, or has in his possession, any die, plate or other instrument for the purpose of counterfeiting a property mark, and also a person who has a property mark in his possession for the purpose of denoting that goods belong to someone to whom they do not belong. The punishment is imprisonment of up to three years, or fine, or both. The section corresponds to IPC Section 485.
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 348 descends from one section of the old Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the concordance carries no “Change” marker against it; it is classed as Exact on Lexovia’s own comparison of the two texts:
| BNS section | IPC, 1860 equivalent | Category |
|---|---|---|
| 348 | S.485 “Making or possession of any instrument for counterfeiting a property mark” | Exact |
A word-by-word comparison of BNS Section 348 with IPC Section 485 shows a single difference, of one word. BNS Section 348 reads “for the purpose of counterfeiting a property mark”, whereas the copy of IPC Section 485 consulted reads “for the purpose of counterfeiting a proper mark”. The IPC text consulted prints “proper mark”. In every other respect — the two limbs of the offence, the “for the purpose of” requirement and the punishment (imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or fine, or both) — the two texts are identical, and the marginal headings match. The category is shown as Exact.
Whoever makes or has in his possession any die, plate or other instrument for the purpose of counterfeiting a property mark, or has in his possession a property mark for the purpose of denoting that any goods belong to a person to whom they do not belong, 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 348 reaches conduct that can happen before any counterfeit mark is applied to a single item of goods. It has two limbs, joined by “or”. In the first, a person makes, or has in his possession, any die, plate or other instrument for the purpose of counterfeiting a property mark. In the second, a person has in his possession a property mark for the purpose of denoting that any goods belong to a person to whom they do not belong. In both limbs the offence is defined by purpose: the section does not punish making or holding an instrument or a mark as such, only doing so for the purpose that the section names. A person who holds an old printing block or a die with no such purpose is not described by the words of the section.
Two terms carry the section. A “property mark” is defined in Section 345(1) as a mark used for denoting that movable property belongs to a particular person, and “movable property” is defined in Section 2(21). To “counterfeit” is defined in Section 2(4): a person is said to counterfeit 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. Explanation 1 to Section 2(4) says that it is not essential to counterfeiting that the imitation should be exact, and Explanation 2 says that where the resemblance is such that a person might be deceived, it is presumed, until the contrary is proved, that the person causing it intended to practise deception or knew it to be likely. Section 2 does not define “die”, “plate” or “instrument”; the section says “any die, plate or other instrument” and does not confine the instrument to any material or form.
Because the first limb speaks of an instrument held “for the purpose of counterfeiting”, the words of the section do not require that any counterfeit mark has yet been applied to goods. The offence is one of making or possessing with the stated purpose. Where counterfeiting is actually carried out, Section 347 (counterfeiting a property mark) may also be relevant, but Section 348 is framed independently of it. The second limb is different in kind: what is held is a property mark itself, not an instrument for making one, and the purpose is that of denoting that goods belong to a person to whom they do not belong. Compare Section 345(2), which describes a person who marks goods, or a receptacle containing goods, in a manner reasonably calculated to cause it to be believed that the goods belong to a person to whom they do not belong as using a false property mark, and Section 345(3), which punishes using a false property mark. Section 348 does not require any use: possession for the stated purpose is enough.
Section 348 sits in a group of provisions on property marks: Section 345 (property mark and false property mark), Section 346 (tampering with a property mark), Section 347 (counterfeiting), Section 349 (selling goods bearing a counterfeit property mark) and Section 350 (false marks on receptacles containing goods). The BNSS First Schedule classifies the offence as non-cognizable and bailable, triable by a Magistrate of the first class. The Schedule’s short description of the offence uses the word “fraudulently”; the section’s own words are “for the purpose of”. Section 348 appears in neither compounding table of BNSS Section 359 (Section 347(1) and Section 349, by contrast, are listed in the first table), so it is not compoundable. The punishment is imprisonment of either description for up to three years, or fine, or both; the section fixes no amount for the fine.
Imprisonment of either description (simple or rigorous) for a term which may extend to three years, or fine, or both. The section does not fix the amount of the fine.
Under the First Schedule to the BNSS the offence is non-cognizable and bailable, and it is triable by a Magistrate of the first class. It is not compoundable: it appears in neither table of BNSS Section 359.
The first limb speaks of making or possessing an instrument “for the purpose of counterfeiting” a property mark. Its words do not require that a counterfeit mark has already been applied to any goods. What the section requires is the stated purpose.
Not by the section’s own words. The offence is making or possessing the instrument for the purpose of counterfeiting a property mark, or possessing a property mark for the purpose of denoting that goods belong to a person to whom they do not belong. Possession without that purpose is not what Section 348 describes.
Section 347 punishes counterfeiting a property mark (sub-section (1): a mark used by another person; sub-section (2): a mark used by a public servant, and related marks). Section 348 is about the instrument or the mark held for the stated purpose. The punishments differ, and the BNSS First Schedule classifies them separately: for example, Section 347(1) is triable by any Magistrate and is compoundable, whereas Section 348 is triable by a Magistrate of the first class and is not compoundable.
No change in the offence or the punishment. The texts differ in one word, which is noted in the concordance section above: the IPC copy consulted prints “proper mark” where the BNS reads “property mark”.