Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Section 217
False information, with intent to cause public servant to use his lawful power to injury of
Whoever gives to any public servant any information which he knows or believes to be false, intending thereby to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, such public servant—
(a) to do or omit anything which such public servant ought not to do or omit if the true state of facts respecting which such information is given were known by him; or
(b) to use the lawful power of such public servant to the injury or annoyance of any person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or with both. Illustrations.
(a) A informs a Magistrate that Z, a police officer, subordinate to such Magistrate, has been guilty of neglect of duty or misconduct, knowing such information to be false, and knowing it to be likely that the information will cause the Magistrate to dismiss Z. A has committed the offence defined in this section.
(b) A falsely informs a public servant that Z has contraband salt in a secret place, knowing such information to be false, and knowing that it is likely that the consequence of the information will be a search of Z’s premises, attended with annoyance to Z. A has committed the offence defined in this section.
(c) A falsely informs a policeman that he has been assaulted and robbed in the neighbourhood of a particular village. He does not mention the name of any person as one of his assailants, but knows it to be likely that in consequence of this information the police will make enquiries and institute searches in the village to the annoyance of the villagers or some of them. A has committed an offence under this section.
Why this exists
This provision descends from Section 182 of the old Indian Penal Code, 1860, drafted by the original law commissioners to stop people from misusing public officials as tools for private revenge or mischief. Colonial-era administrators were vulnerable to being misled into raids, dismissals, or punitive actions based on fabricated complaints. The law criminalizes not the mistake of an honest complainant, but the deliberate act of lying to manipulate state power against someone, protecting both public servants from being duped and citizens from being harassed through official machinery.
How courts read it
Courts under the equivalent IPC Section 182 have consistently held that the prosecution must prove the informant *knew* the information was false (or believed it false) — an honest, mistaken, or even careless complaint does not attract this section unless dishonesty or knowledge of falsity is shown. Courts have also clarified that actual harm to the person targeted is not required; it is enough that the public servant was likely to act adversely or that annoyance was a likely consequence. False complaints made to police leading to unnecessary investigations or arrests have frequently been examined under this provision.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: You can only be punished under this section if the false complaint actually leads to someone being harmed.
Fact: Courts have read this section to only require that harm or annoyance was a likely, intended consequence — not that it actually happened. - Myth: An honest but wrong complaint to police is punishable under this section.
Fact: The law requires that the person knew or believed the information was false; a genuine mistake is not covered.