Section 208 IPC: Fraudulently Suffering Decree for Sum Not Due
Section 208 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 dealt with fraudulent use of judicial decrees or orders against oneself, including permitting a decree for money or property not lawfully due and permitting execution after the decree or order had already been satisfied.
Section 208 IPC - meaning and scope
The section applied where a person fraudulently caused or suffered a decree or order to be passed against himself at another person's suit for a sum not due, for a larger sum than was due, or for property or an interest in property to which that other person was not entitled.
It also applied where a person fraudulently caused or suffered a decree or order to be executed against himself after it had been satisfied, or in respect of anything for which it had already been satisfied.
Essential ingredients of Section 208 IPC
- A decree or order must be caused or suffered to be passed or executed against the accused.
- The conduct must be fraudulent.
- For the first branch, the decree or order must concern a sum not due, a sum larger than what is due, or property or an interest to which the claimant is not entitled.
- For the second branch, the decree or order must be caused or suffered to be executed after satisfaction, wholly or in respect of the relevant subject matter.
Meaning of "fraudulently"
Under the IPC framework, doing a thing "fraudulently" involved doing it with intent to defraud. Section 208 therefore targeted deliberate misuse of the judicial process, not merely an incorrect decree, a disputed calculation or an ordinary procedural error without the required fraudulent element.
Decree for a sum not due or an excessive sum
The provision covered a person who fraudulently allowed a decree or order to pass against himself for money that was not due to the claimant. It also expressly covered a decree for a larger sum than was actually due. This could protect genuine creditors and the judicial process against arrangements designed to create an artificial or inflated liability.
Decree concerning property without entitlement
Section 208 was not limited to money. It also covered a decree or order for property, or an interest in property, to which the person obtaining the decree or order was not entitled, provided the accused fraudulently caused or suffered that result.
Execution after satisfaction
The second branch addressed a decree or order that may originally have been valid but had already been satisfied. Fraudulently allowing it to be executed again against oneself, or allowing execution for something in respect of which it had already been satisfied, was expressly covered by the section.
Statutory illustration
Illustration: A institutes a suit against Z. Z, knowing that A is likely to obtain a decree against him, fraudulently suffers a judgment to pass against him for a larger amount at the suit of B, who has no just claim against him, so that B, either for himself or for Z's benefit, may share in the proceeds of a sale of Z's property made under A's decree. The illustration states that Z commits an offence under Section 208.
Punishment under Section 208 IPC
| Provision | Punishment |
|---|---|
| Section 208 IPC | Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or fine, or both. |
Section 208 and neighbouring provisions
Section 207 IPC dealt with fraudulent claims to property intended to prevent seizure as forfeited or in execution. Section 208 instead addressed a person fraudulently causing or suffering an improper decree or order against himself. Section 209 IPC separately dealt with dishonestly making a false claim in a Court.
Practical summary
Section 208 IPC protected the integrity of judicial decrees and execution proceedings against collusive or fraudulent use. The offence depended on the fraudulent causing or suffering of the decree, order or execution in one of the circumstances specified by the section.