Section 235: Using as True Certificate Known to Be False in Material Point

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita • Chapter XII: Of Contempts of Lawful Authority of Public Servants • Official Statutory Text & Legal Guide

Chapter XII: Of Contempts of Lawful Authority of Public Servants
Court by which offence triable
Bailable
Non-Cognizable
Formerly Sec 198 IPC

BNSS First Schedule Legal Classification

Procedural Trial, Bail & Arrest Mandate under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Official BNSS Schedule I
Offence / Provision Statutory Punishment Bail Status Cognizance Trial Jurisdiction Old IPC Equivalent
Section 235 BNS
Using as True Certificate Known to Be False in Material Point
Same punishment as for giving false evidence. Bailable Non-Cognizable Court by which offence triable Formerly Sec 198 IPC
Statutory classification established under the First Schedule of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. Governs all FIR registrations, bail hearings, and criminal trial jurisdictions in Indian courts.

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 235

Section 235 penalises using as a true certificate any certificate known to be false in a material point, imposing the same punishment as if the user had signed or issued the false certificate.

  • False Certificate: A certificate known to be false in a material particular.
  • Use as Genuine: Corruptly tendering, presenting, or relying upon the certificate as true before any authority.
  • Fraudulent Knowledge: Knowing or having reason to believe that the certificate is spurious.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • State of Maharashtra v. Budhikota Subbarao (1993) 3 SCC 339: Affirmed that presenting fabricated educational or professional credentials to obtain public office constitutes a completed offence.
  • Union of India v. M. Bhaskar (1996) 4 SCC 416: Held that candidates securing government employment using bogus caste or qualification certificates are liable to dismissal and criminal prosecution.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

Trace the chain of custody of the submitted document. Defence should show lack of knowledge if the document was prepared by an independent intermediary without the client's complicity.