Section 170 IPC: Personating a Public Servant

Section 170 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 punished a person who knowingly pretended to hold a particular office as a public servant, or falsely personated another person holding such office, and in that assumed character did or attempted to do an act under colour of that office.

Text of Section 170 IPC

Meaning and Scope of Section 170 IPC

Section 170 targeted false assumption of public authority followed by conduct, or an attempted act, undertaken under the colour of the falsely assumed office. The provision covered both a person who falsely claimed to hold a particular public office and a person who falsely personated another individual who actually held such office.

The wording of the section contains two connected stages. There must first be the required false pretence or personation, accompanied by the knowledge specified in the section where applicable. The accused must then, in that assumed character, do or attempt to do an act under colour of the office.

Essential Ingredients of Section 170 IPC

• Pretence of a particular public office: The accused may pretend to hold a particular office as a public servant while knowing that he or she does not hold that office.
• Alternatively, false personation: The accused may falsely personate another person who holds such public office.
• Assumed official character: The accused must act in the character falsely assumed.
• Act or attempt: In that assumed character, the accused must do or attempt to do an act.
• Under colour of the office: The act or attempted act must be presented or undertaken as if supported by the authority of the falsely assumed public office.

Pretending to Hold a Public Office

The first branch of Section 170 applied where a person pretended to hold a particular office as a public servant while knowing that the person did not hold that office. The requirement of a "particular office" links the false representation to an identifiable public position rather than a vague claim of importance or influence.

Falsely Personating Another Public Servant

The second branch covered falsely personating another person who held the relevant office. This addresses impersonation of an actual office-holder, while the first branch also covers falsely claiming the office itself without necessarily assuming the identity of a particular real person.

Meaning of "Public Servant"

Section 21 IPC contained the Code's extensive definition of "public servant". In considering Section 170, the nature of the particular office falsely claimed or personated is relevant because the offence concerns the assumption of an office as a public servant.

Act Under Colour of Office

False representation alone is not the whole statutory formulation in Section 170. The section further requires that, in the assumed character, the person does or attempts to do an act under colour of such office. In practical terms, the alleged act or attempt must be connected with the supposed authority of the office being falsely assumed.

For example, the statutory inquiry would focus on whether the accused purported to exercise, invoke or rely upon the authority associated with the falsely assumed public office. The actual facts and the nature of the claimed office determine whether this element is established.

An Attempted Official Act Is Expressly Covered

Section 170 expressly uses the words "does or attempts to do any act". Completion of the purported official act was therefore not required by the wording of the provision. An attempt to act under colour of the falsely assumed office could satisfy this part of the section if the other statutory ingredients were present.

Punishment Under Section 170 IPC

Section 170 and Section 171 IPC

Section 171 IPC dealt with wearing garb or carrying a token resembling that used by a class of public servants, with the intention that it may be believed, or with knowledge that it is likely to be believed, that the person belongs to that class when the person does not. Section 170, by contrast, required the false assumption or personation of public office together with doing or attempting an act under colour of that office.

Difference Between Section 170 and Genuine Exercise of Office

Section 170 is directed at a person who does not hold the particular office claimed, or who falsely personates another office-holder. It is therefore distinct from provisions dealing with misconduct by a person who genuinely is a public servant. Sections such as Section 166 IPC, Section 167 IPC, Section 168 IPC and Section 169 IPC addressed specified forms of conduct by persons acting as public servants.

Practical Application of Section 170

A Section 170 analysis should identify the particular public office allegedly assumed, the accused's knowledge that he or she did not hold that office where that branch of the provision is invoked, and the conduct relied upon as an act or attempted act under colour of the office. The connection between the false official character and the act or attempt is an important part of the statutory language.

Position After 1 July 2024

The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was replaced for the new criminal-law regime by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024, subject to the applicable repeal and savings provisions. Section 170 IPC can therefore remain relevant where the earlier law governs the alleged conduct or proceeding. For conduct governed by the new regime, the applicable provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 should be examined.

Note: This article explains the pre-BNS statutory position for general legal information. Application of Section 170 depends on the precise false representation, the public office allegedly assumed and the act or attempted act said to have been done under colour of that office.