What is IPC Section 486?
IPC Section 486 falls within Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code ("Offences Relating to Documents and to Property Marks"), under the sub-heading "Of Property and Other Marks." This part of the Code deals with counterfeiting and misusing marks that identify who made, owns, or is responsible for goods — the forerunner, in many ways, to modern trademark protection. Sections 478 to 489 build a graduated scheme covering the use of false property marks, counterfeiting such marks, making instruments for counterfeiting, and — the focus of Section 486 — actually selling goods that carry a counterfeit mark.
What sets Section 486 apart is its structure: rather than requiring the prosecution to prove the seller knew the mark was fake, the section presumes liability once the basic facts (sale, exposure for sale, or possession for sale of counterfeit-marked goods) are shown, and shifts the burden to the seller to establish one of three specific defences. This reflects a policy choice: sellers are expected to exercise genuine care about what they stock and sell, and cannot simply claim ignorance without more.
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With effect from 1 July 2024, the Indian Penal Code has been replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 for offences committed on or after that date.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 486 IPC now corresponds to Section 349 of the BNS, which carries forward the identical rule, punishment, and reverse-burden structure without substantive change.
Legal Provision — Text of Section 486 IPC
Note the structure: defences (a) and (b) work together (both must be shown), while defence (c) — acting innocently in some other way — stands as an independent, alternative route to escaping liability.
Punishment, Cognizance & Bail Under Section 486
| Imprisonment | Imprisonment of either description (simple or rigorous) for a term which may extend to 1 year |
|---|---|
| Fine | No fixed limit — decided by the court based on the facts, or fine may be imposed instead of imprisonment |
| Nature of Offence | Non-cognizable — police cannot investigate or arrest without a warrant or Magistrate's order |
| Bailable / Non-Bailable | Bailable — bail is available as a matter of right |
| Compoundable | Compoundable, by the person to whom loss or injury is caused by the use of the counterfeit mark |
| Triable By | Any Magistrate |
The compoundability of Section 486 is notable — unlike most Chapter XVIII offences, this one can be settled directly with the affected brand owner or person who suffered the loss, which in practice makes negotiated resolutions common in counterfeit-goods disputes.
Key Ingredients / Essential Elements
The accused sold, exposed for sale, or possessed for sale, goods or things
Any one of these three acts is sufficient — actual sale is not required if the goods were merely displayed or stocked for sale.
A counterfeit property mark was affixed to the goods or their packaging
The mark must be a counterfeit of a genuine property mark — affixed either directly to the goods or to the case, package, or receptacle containing them.
Liability is presumed unless the accused proves a specific defence
The burden shifts to the accused to establish either (a) reasonable precautions plus no reason to suspect the mark, combined with (b) full disclosure of the supplier when demanded, or (c) that they otherwise acted innocently.
If You Are Involved on Either Side of a Section 486 Dispute
Section 486 disputes typically arise when a genuine brand owner discovers counterfeit-marked goods being sold, and pursues the seller — who may or may not have known the goods were fake. What matters depends on which side of that dispute you are on.
If You Are the Brand Owner / Person Suffering Loss
- Document the counterfeit goods clearly — photographs, purchase receipts, and comparison with your genuine property mark.
- Report the matter to the police, or file a complaint before the appropriate Magistrate, since the offence is non-cognizable.
- Consider whether you wish to pursue compounding (settlement) directly with the seller, since Section 486 allows this with your consent.
- Assess whether related offences (such as Section 483 for counterfeiting, if you can trace the source) should also be pursued.
- Consult a criminal or IP-focused lawyer to build the strongest case around the seller's knowledge and precautions.
If You Are a Seller Accused Under Section 486
- Do not make statements to the police without a lawyer present.
- Gather evidence of the precautions you took before stocking or selling the goods — invoices, supplier verification, prior dealings, and due diligence records.
- Be prepared to disclose full information about your supplier if demanded, since this is one of the statutory defences.
- If you genuinely had no reason to suspect the goods were counterfeit, document why — this is central to your defence given the reverse burden.
- Since the offence is compoundable, consider whether a settlement with the affected brand owner or loss-bearer is a realistic route to resolution.
The Reverse Burden — Why Sellers Cannot Simply Plead Ignorance
Section 486's structure means a bare claim of "I didn't know" is not, by itself, a defence. The accused must affirmatively prove — with reasonable precautions taken, genuine lack of suspicion, and full disclosure of the supplier when asked — that they meet one of the statutory conditions. This places real practical weight on sellers to actually verify their supply chains, particularly for goods and brands prone to counterfeiting.
Complaint & Trial Process Under Section 486
Counterfeit-Marked Goods Are Discovered
A brand owner, investigator, or authority discovers goods bearing a counterfeit property mark being sold or offered for sale.
Complaint Filed
Since the offence is non-cognizable, a complaint is typically filed before a Magistrate, who can direct police investigation or take cognizance directly.
Investigation and Bail
The matter is investigated, and being bailable, the accused seller is ordinarily entitled to bail as a matter of course.
Trial — Burden on the Accused
At trial, once the prosecution establishes the sale, exposure, or possession for sale of counterfeit-marked goods, the burden shifts to the accused to prove one of the three statutory defences.
Compounding or Sentencing
The parties may compound (settle) the matter at any stage with the consent of the person who suffered loss; absent settlement, conviction can result in up to 1 year's imprisonment, fine, or both.
Judicial Interpretation of Section 486
Courts have generally read the reverse-burden defences in Section 486 as requiring genuine, demonstrable diligence rather than mere assertion. This is general legal information for awareness — always have a lawyer verify how these principles apply to your specific facts.
"Reasonable Precautions" Requires Genuine Due Diligence
Courts interpreting the reverse-burden defence under Section 486 have required an accused seller to show real, demonstrable precautions — such as verifying suppliers, checking for signs of counterfeiting, and maintaining purchase records — rather than accepting a bare claim of having "no reason to suspect" the mark's genuineness without any supporting evidence of actual diligence.
Disclosure of the Supplier Is Central to the Combined Defence
Courts have treated the requirement to disclose, on demand, full information about the source of the goods as a genuine, substantive condition of the defence under clauses (a) and (b) — an accused who is unable or unwilling to identify their supplier when asked cannot rely on this route to escape liability, even if they otherwise claim to have acted carefully.