BNS Section 228: Fabricating False Evidence

Illustrations.
(a) A puts jewels into a box belonging to Z, with the intention that they may be found in that box, and that this circumstance may cause Z to be convicted of theft. A has fabricated false evidence.

(b) A makes a false entry in his shop-book for the purpose of using it as corroborative evidence in a Court. A has fabricated false evidence.

(c) A, with the intention of causing Z to be convicted of a criminal conspiracy, writes a letter in imitation of Z’s handwriting, purporting to be addressed to an accomplice in such criminal conspiracy, and puts the letter in a place which he knows that the officers of the police are likely to search. A has fabricated false evidence.”

The offender:
The first part of the section defines the offender as any person who deliberately causes a specific circumstance to occur by performing certain actions. The actions have been listed as follows:

• 1. Deliberately creating a circumstance by their action
• 2. Making a false entry in any book or any record, including electronic records.
• 3. Making a document or a record that contains a false statement.

The offense:
If any of the above actions are performed with the intention of having it presented as evidence in a judicial proceeding, or in a proceeding taken by law before a public servant as such, or before an arbitrator, then it shall be defined as “fabricating false evidence.”

In other words, the documents, statements or records that have been fabricated or falsified have been specifically fabricated or falsified with the intention of misleading an ongoing government proceedings by presenting them as genuine evidence in front of:

• 1. A judge or a magistrate
• 2. Any public servant authorised to preside over a government proceeding such as, such as a revenue officer or an income tax officer
• 3. An arbitrator. An arbitrator, though not technically an employee of the government, does act as an agent of the government in official government proceedings.

Further, it states that when such an action may cause the above persons to entertain an erroneous opinion, then it shall be an offence. The usage of the words “may cause” must be specifically noted as it implies that it is not necessary for the person presiding over the proceeding to actually make an erroneous opinion. Even if the case takes its natural course and justice is delivered, the fact that the falsified evidence was presented as genuine evidence and that there was a possibility of that causing an erroneous opinion is sufficient to make it an offense. In other words, even if falsifying the evidence did not bear the intended result, the person found guilty of it will still be prosecuted for the attempt to do so.

The above actions may not be considered as “fabricating false evidence” under this section if:

• 1. If the documents have not been falsified for the purpose of presenting it as evidence in front of these authorities, then the provisions of this section may not be applicable.
• 2. If they have been falsified without knowing that they would be presented as evidence in the circumstances mentioned in the section.
• 3. The person to whom the evidence is presented is not the presiding authority in the proceeding and is not entitled to opine on the evidence.

However, there are other sections that provide for the general falsification of documents and any criminal act or injury occurring from such actions shall be punishable under the provisions of those respective sections.

Three distinct illustrations have been provided in the section to give an idea of what amounts to “fabricating false evidence” under this section.