Section 476 IPC: Counterfeiting Device or Mark Used for Authenticating Other Documents
Section 476 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 dealt with counterfeiting a device or mark used for authenticating a document or electronic record other than the documents described in Section 467, and with possession of material bearing such a counterfeit device or mark with the required intent.
Section 476 IPC - statutory provision
Counterfeiting device or mark used for authenticating documents other than those described in Section 467, or possessing counterfeit marked material.
Section 476 applied where a person counterfeited, upon or in the substance of any material, a device or mark used to authenticate any document or electronic record other than documents described in Section 467, intending that it be used to give an appearance of authenticity to a document already forged or thereafter to be forged on that material. It also covered possession, with such intent, of material upon or in which such a device or mark had been counterfeited.
Essential ingredients of Section 476 IPC
The provision targeted counterfeit authentication features and counterfeit-marked material rather than merely the underlying act of making a false document. Its essential elements included:
- a device or mark used for authenticating a document or electronic record;
- the relevant document must be outside the special category described in Section 467 IPC;
- counterfeiting of the device or mark upon or in material, or possession of material bearing such a counterfeit device or mark; and
- intent that the device or mark be used to give an appearance of authenticity to a forged document.
Meaning of document and electronic record
The text of Section 476 was expanded by the Information Technology Act, 2000. With effect from 17 October 2000, the expression covering the authenticated subject included a document or electronic record. This ensured that the provision was not confined to conventional paper documents.
Punishment under Section 476 IPC
The punishment was imprisonment of either description for a term which could extend to seven years, and the offender was also liable to fine.
Nature of the offence under the pre-BNSS CrPC
| Particular | Pre-BNS / pre-BNSS position |
|---|---|
| Provision | Section 476, Indian Penal Code, 1860 |
| Maximum punishment | Imprisonment up to seven years and fine |
| Cognizability | Non-cognizable |
| Bail | Non-bailable |
| Trial | Magistrate of the first class |
Difference between Sections 475 and 476 IPC
The principal distinction was the category of document to which the authentication device or mark related. Section 475 IPC applied to devices or marks used for authenticating documents described in Section 467. Section 476 applied to devices or marks used for authenticating documents or electronic records other than those described in Section 467.
| Provision | Authentication relates to | Punishment |
|---|---|---|
| Section 475 IPC | Documents described in Section 467 | Imprisonment for life, or imprisonment up to seven years, and fine |
| Section 476 IPC | Documents or electronic records other than documents described in Section 467 | Imprisonment up to seven years and fine |
Key legal point
For Section 476, the required intent was central. Counterfeiting an authentication device or mark, or possessing counterfeit-marked material, had to be accompanied by the intent that the device or mark be used to make a forged document appear authentic.
Historical amendment: Act 21 of 2000 substituted the words relating to "document or electronic record" for the earlier reference to "document", with effect from 17 October 2000.