Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Section 212
Furnishing false information
Whoever, being legally bound to furnish information on any subject to any public servant, as such, furnishes, as true, information on the subject which he knows or has reason to believe to be false,—
(a) shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both;
(b) where the information which he is legally bound to give respects the commission of an offence, or is required for the purpose of preventing the commission of an offence, or in order to the apprehension of an offender, with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. Illustrations.
(a) A, a landholder, knowing of the commission of a murder within the limits of his estate, wilfully misinforms the Magistrate of the district that the death has occurred by accident in consequence of the bite of a snake. A is guilty of the offence defined in this section.
(b) A, a village watchman, knowing that a considerable body of strangers has passed through his village in order to commit a dacoity in the house of Z, a wealthy merchant residing in a neighbouring place, and being legally bound to give early and punctual information of the above fact to the officer of the nearest police station, wilfully misinforms the police officer that a body of suspicious characters passed through the village with a view to commit dacoity in a certain distant place in a different direction. Here A is guilty of the offence defined in this section. Explanation.—In section 211 and in this section the word “offence” include any act committed at any place out of India, which, if committed in India, would be punishable under any of the following sections, namely, 103, 105, 307, sub-sections (2), (3) and (4) of section 309, sub-sections (2), (3), (4) and (5) of section 310, 311, 312, clauses (f) and (g) of section 326, sub-sections (4), (6), (7) and (8) of section 331, clauses (a) and (b) of section 332 and the word “offender” includes any person who is alleged to have been guilty of any such act.
Why this exists
This provision continues the logic of the old Indian Penal Code's Section 177. It exists to ensure that people who have a legal duty to report information to the state—like witnesses, officials, or watchmen—do not undermine justice by lying. The two-tier punishment structure reflects that lying about a serious crime (or hindering its prevention or an offender's capture) is far more damaging to public safety than routine false reporting, so it deserves a harsher penalty.
How courts read it
Courts have historically required that the accused had an actual legal duty (not just a moral or social one) to furnish the information, and that the false statement was made 'as true'—meaning the person asserted it confidently rather than expressing doubt. Courts have also distinguished this offence from general lying, emphasizing that mere silence or refusal to answer does not attract this section; only affirmative false statements to a public servant, in discharge of a legal obligation, are punishable.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: This section punishes anyone who lies to a police officer.
Fact: It only applies when the person has a *legal duty* to provide that specific information—not just any casual conversation with an officer. - Myth: Refusing to answer a question is the same as lying under this section.
Fact: This section punishes affirmatively giving false information as true, not merely staying silent or refusing to respond.