Section 28

The IPC uses the word 'counterfeit' in many later sections (like counterfeiting coins, currency notes, stamps, or property marks). Section 28 was drafted as a definition clause so that this key word carries one fixed, precise meaning throughout the Code, instead of being interpreted differently in each offence. It captures two mental states: the deliberate intent to deceive, or merely knowing deception is a likely result, even without a specific plan to defraud anyone in particular.

Courts have consistently held that the essence of 'counterfeiting' is the creation of resemblance meant to pass off one thing as another, and that actual deception of a victim need not be proved — it is enough that the resemblance was created with intent to deceive or with knowledge that deception was likely. Judgments interpreting related sections (like those on counterfeit coins or currency) rely on this definition to test whether an object's similarity to the genuine article was close enough, and whether the accused's mental state (intent or knowledge) is established.

• Myth: Counterfeiting only counts if someone is actually fooled.
  Fact: Courts have read this section to mean that intent or knowledge of likely deception is enough — actual deception of a victim doesn't need to be proved.
• Myth: Counterfeiting only applies to money or currency.
  Fact: This definition is general and applies wherever the word 'counterfeit' is used in the IPC, including coins, stamps, and property marks, not just currency notes.