What is IPC Section 464?
IPC Section 464 sits in Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code, "Of Offences Relating to Documents and to Property Marks." Section 463 defines "forgery" itself — making a false document or false electronic record with intent to cause damage or injury, to support a claim, to cause someone to part with property, or to commit fraud. Section 464 then substantiates that definition by specifying precisely when a document or electronic record is considered to have been "made falsely" for the purposes of forgery.
Section 464 sets out three broad ways a document can be made falsely: (First) dishonestly or fraudulently making, signing, or altering a document with intent to cause it to be believed it was made by someone else, or by someone's authority, when it was not; (Secondly) dishonestly or fraudulently altering a genuine document in a material part, without lawful authority, after it was made; and (Thirdly) dishonestly or fraudulently causing a person to sign, seal, execute, or alter a document while they are unable to understand its contents due to unsoundness of mind, intoxication, or deception practised on them.
Important Update: IPC to BNS Transition
With effect from 1 July 2024, the Indian Penal Code has been replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 for offences committed on or after that date. Section 464 IPC now corresponds to Section 335 of the BNS, which retains the same substance, with the "First/Secondly/Thirdly" structure reorganised into clauses (A), (B), and (C).
Legal Provision — Text of Section 464 IPC
Illustration: A has a letter of credit upon B for ₹10,000 written by Z. To defraud B, A adds a cipher to the 10,000, making the sum ₹1,00,000, intending it to be believed that Z so wrote the letter. A has committed forgery. Two Explanations extend the section: a person's own signature can amount to forgery where used to deceive as to authorship (Explanation 1), and making a document in the name of a fictitious or deceased person, intending it to be believed the document was made by a real, living person, may also amount to forgery (Explanation 2).
Section 464 and the Related Punishment Provisions
| Section 464 Itself | Purely definitional — carries no independent punishment |
|---|---|
| Section 463 | Defines the offence of "forgery" as a whole, of which Section 464 supplies one essential ingredient |
| Section 465 | General punishment for forgery — imprisonment up to 2 years, or fine, or both |
| Section 467 | Forgery of a valuable security, will, or authority to make/transfer a valuable security — up to life imprisonment |
| Section 468 | Forgery for the purpose of cheating — up to 7 years and fine |
| Section 471 | Using a forged document as genuine — punished as if the person had forged it |
Because Section 464 is definitional, its "classification" (cognizable/bailable/compoundable) is not independently fixed — it depends on which specific punishment provision (465, 467, 468, 471, etc.) the conduct is ultimately charged under.
Key Ingredients / Essential Elements
Dishonest or fraudulent intent
The act of making, signing, executing, or altering the document must be done dishonestly or fraudulently — an innocent error is not enough.
Intention to deceive as to authorship or authority
For the "First" limb, there must be an intention to cause it to be believed that the document was made by, or under the authority of, a person who did not actually make it or authorise it.
The accused must be the actual "maker" of the document
Courts have held that liability under Section 464 attaches only to the person who actually made, signed, or altered the document — not to someone who merely executed or used a document made by someone else.
Covers physical documents and electronic records
The section explicitly extends to electronic records and electronic signatures, reflecting the modern reality of digital forgery.
What Should You Do — For Victims and For the Accused
If a False Document Was Made Against Your Interest
- Preserve the original document (or a certified copy) and any evidence of the genuine version, if one exists.
- Engage a handwriting or forensic document examiner where the falsity involves a signature or alteration that isn't obvious.
- File an FIR, since offences under Sections 465–471 (which punish the forgery defined by Section 464) are generally cognizable.
- Identify who actually made or altered the document, since liability under Section 464 attaches specifically to the maker, not merely to someone who benefited from or used it.
If You Are Accused of Forgery Under Section 464
- Consult a criminal lawyer immediately, and do not make detailed statements to police without legal advice.
- If you were not the actual maker of the document — for instance, you merely relied on or executed something prepared by someone else — this can be a significant defence, since Section 464 liability is specific to the maker.
- Gather evidence of your good-faith belief in the document's authenticity, if relevant to your role.
- Understand the specific punishment provision (465, 467, 468, or 471) under which you are charged, since bail and trial procedure depend on that provision.
FIR & Trial Process for Forgery Under Section 464
Registration of the Case
An FIR is registered under the applicable punishment provision (Section 465, 467, 468, or 471), since Section 464 itself is only definitional.
Investigation
Investigation focuses on establishing who actually made or altered the document, the dishonest or fraudulent intent, and expert forensic examination of the document or electronic record.
Bail
Bail availability depends on the specific provision charged — simple forgery (Section 465) is generally bailable, while forgery of a valuable security (Section 467) is non-bailable.
Trial
The court examines whether all ingredients of both Section 463 (forgery) and Section 464 (making a false document) are established, since courts have held both must be satisfied together.
Important Cases on Section 464
Sheila Sebastian v. R. Jawaharaj & Anr., (2018) 7 SCC 581
The Supreme Court held that liability under Section 464 attaches only to the actual "maker" of a false document — a person who merely executes a document under false pretences, without themselves being the maker in the literal sense, cannot be convicted of forgery. The Court also held that all ingredients of both Sections 463 and 464 must be satisfied before a conviction under Section 465 can be sustained.
Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar, (2009) 8 SCC 751
The Court distinguished between executing a document under false pretences and genuinely "making" a false document, clarifying the precise circumstances in which a person is said to have made a false document under Section 464.
Mir Nagvi Askari v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2009) 15 SCC 643
The Court clarified that mere execution of a document, without making or altering it in the sense required by Section 464, does not constitute forgery.