If you are a practicing advocate in India, the number “420” was once the most instinctive legal citation in your vocabulary. It meant cheating. It meant fraud. It meant dishonest inducement to deliver property. But since 1 July 2024, citing Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for a newly committed offence is technically citing a repealed law.
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 replaced the IPC on 1 July 2024, along with two companion statutes: the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) replacing the CrPC, and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) replacing the Indian Evidence Act. Under this sweeping legislative reform, Section 420 IPC is now Section 318(4) BNS.
This is not just a renumbering exercise. The shift carries real procedural consequences — for bail applications, FIR drafting, charge framing, and digital evidence strategy. This guide walks you through every dimension of the IPC 420 to BNS conversion that you need to master in 2024 and beyond.
Overview
What Was Section 420 IPC?
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, dealt with cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property. It was one of the most frequently invoked penal provisions across trial courts in India, covering everything from real estate fraud and investment scams to bounced cheques and broken contractual promises.
The maximum punishment under Section 420 IPC was imprisonment up to 7 years and a fine. The offence was non-bailable and cognizable.
What Is BNS Section 318?
Under the BNS, the entire architecture of cheating-related offences has been restructured. The BNS consolidates the older IPC Sections 415, 417, 418, and 420 into a single, tiered provision under Section 318 BNS, with four sub-sections that create a graded punishment hierarchy based on the nature and severity of the deception:
- Section 318(1) BNS — Simple cheating (formerly Section 415 IPC)
- Section 318(2) BNS — Cheating causing damage or harm (formerly Section 417 IPC)
- Section 318(3) BNS — Cheating with knowledge of likely loss to a protected party
- Section 318(4) BNS — Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property or valuable security (formerly Section 420 IPC)
The key takeaway for advocates: Section 420 IPC = Section 318(4) BNS.
Full Conversion Reference
The table below provides the authoritative side-by-side mapping for quick reference in courts and while drafting pleadings:
| IPC Section | Description | BNS Equivalent |
| Section 415 IPC | Cheating (definition) | Section 316 BNS |
| Section 417 IPC | Punishment for cheating | Section 318(2) BNS |
| Section 418 IPC | Cheating with knowledge of likely loss | Section 318(3) BNS |
| Section 420 IPC | Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property | Section 318(4) BNS |
Related Section Conversions You Must Know
When dealing with a cheating case, co-accused provisions often travel alongside Section 420. Here are the companion conversions:
| IPC Section | Description | BNS Equivalent |
| Section 406 IPC | Criminal Breach of Trust | Section 316 BNS |
| Section 467 IPC | Forgery of valuable security | Section 336(2) BNS |
| Section 468 IPC | Forgery for cheating | Section 336(3) BNS |
| Section 471 IPC | Using forged document | Section 336(4) BNS |
| Section 120B IPC | Criminal Conspiracy | Section 61(2) BNS |
Key Changes and Requirements
1. Mandatory Fine
One of the most significant changes under Section 318(4) BNS is that the fine is now mandatory, not discretionary. The statutory language reads “shall also be liable to fine,” effectively removing the Magistrate’s earlier discretion to impose imprisonment without a financial penalty. Always factor this into your sentencing submissions and settlement negotiations.
2. Graded Sub-Sections Create New Drafting Obligations
Because Section 318 now contains four sub-sections, prosecutors and complainants must be precise about which sub-section the facts disclose. A vague FIR that merely cites “Section 318 BNS” without specifying the sub-section may be challenged at the threshold for framing of charges.
3. Digital Fraud Is Now Explicitly Covered
Section 318(4) BNS is interpreted to cover modern frauds including cryptocurrency scams, online investment schemes, fake job offers, dating app fraud, and e-commerce fraud. Courts in 2025-2026 are increasingly combining Section 318(4) BNS with:
- Section 66C IT Act (identity theft)
- Section 66D IT Act (cheating by impersonation using computer resources)
- Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) provisions
4. Digital Evidence Under BSA
Since most cheating cases today leave an electronic footprint — WhatsApp chats, emails, UPI transaction records, forged PDF agreements — the admissibility of digital evidence is now governed by Section 63 BSA (replacing Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act). For defence counsel, attacking the BSA certificate at the earliest stage is a primary strategy.
5. Transitional Rule: The Golden Date is 1 July 2024
The governing principle is straightforward:
- Offence committed on or before 30 June 2024: IPC Section 420 applies substantively; procedural aspects from 1 July 2024 onwards are governed by BNSS.
- Offence committed on or after 1 July 2024: Section 318(4) BNS applies substantively; BNSS governs procedure throughout.
- Continuing offence spanning the transition date: Police practice now favours citing both Section 420 IPC and Section 318(4) BNS in the FIR, and courts accept this dual citation.
Step-by-Step Process: FIR Registration Procedure
The procedure for registering an FIR under Section 318(4) BNS has evolved under the BNSS framework. Here is the complete step-by-step guide for complainants and their advocates:
Step 1: Identify the Correct Police Station
The FIR must be filed at the police station within whose territorial jurisdiction the deception occurred or where the property was delivered. For online fraud, jurisdiction may lie where the victim accessed the fraudulent communication.
Under the BNSS, the Zero FIR provision allows a victim to file a complaint at any police station in India, which must then be transferred to the competent station.
Step 2: Draft the Complaint
Prepare a detailed written complaint addressed to the Station House Officer (SHO). The complaint must clearly:
- Establish the dishonest intent of the accused at the inception of the transaction (not merely at the point of default)
- Identify how the accused deceived the complainant through false representation or concealment
- Specify what property, money, or valuable security was delivered as a direct result of the deception
- Cite Section 318(4) BNS explicitly for post-July 2024 offences
Step 3: Preliminary Inquiry in Commercial Cases
For complex commercial cheating matters, the BNSS guidelines encourage a Preliminary Inquiry before formal FIR registration. This is designed to prevent the misuse of criminal law in what are essentially civil contractual disputes. Anticipate this stage and prepare supporting documents.
Step 4: FIR Registration and e-FIR
The BNSS mandates the availability of electronic FIR registration under Section 173 BNSS. Many metropolitan police stations now accept e-FIRs. Once registered, the complainant is entitled to a free copy of the FIR.
Step 5: Seizure and Preservation of Digital Evidence
Under Section 105 BNSS, all search and seizure operations — including seizure of mobile phones, laptops, and servers — must be videographed. Defence counsel should request the seizure panchnama and videography records early.
Step 6: Bail Application
Because Section 318(4) BNS is non-bailable, the arrested accused must apply for bail:
- Anticipatory Bail: Under Section 482 BNSS (formerly Section 438 CrPC) — file immediately upon apprehending arrest
- Regular Bail: Under Section 481 BNSS (formerly Section 437 CrPC) — after arrest, before or after charge sheet filing
The strongest grounds for bail in cheating cases remain: civil nature of the dispute, absence of inception malice, and availability of the accused to cooperate with investigation.
Step 7: Trial
The case follows Warrant Procedure. The prosecution must prove dishonest inducement beyond reasonable doubt. At the charge framing stage, consider filing a discharge application under Section 250 BNSS if the FIR does not disclose pre-meditated fraudulent intent.
Jurisdiction and Forum-Specific Variations
District and Sessions Courts
Section 318(4) BNS, while carrying a 7-year maximum, is triable by any Judicial Magistrate of First Class (JMFC). Sessions Court jurisdiction is only attracted when the case is committed or involves offences with higher punishment running concurrently.
High Court Interventions
FIR quashing petitions are filed under Section 528 BNSS (replacing Section 482 CrPC) before the High Court. The Supreme Court’s guidelines in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992) and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) remain fully applicable.
State-Specific Procedural Variations
Some states have developed specialized practices:
- Rajasthan: The Rajasthan High Court’s ruling in Vijay Sharma v. State of Rajasthan (2024) confirmed the dual framework — IPC substantively for pre-July 2024 offences, BNSS procedurally for all FIRs after 1 July 2024.
- Uttar Pradesh: Historical restrictions on anticipatory bail in economic offences influence how Sessions Judges approach BNSS anticipatory bail applications in cheating matters.
- Metropolitan Courts (Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai): CMM Courts are insisting that private complaint drafts include a dedicated paragraph explaining the Date of Occurrence to justify citing IPC versus BNS.
Cybercrime Jurisdiction
For online fraud under Section 318(4) BNS, victims can also report to:
- cybercrime.gov.in (National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal)
- Helpline 1930 for immediate bank account freezing of the fraudster
Common Mistakes
Practitioners — even experienced ones — are making avoidable errors during this transition. Here are the most critical ones:
Mistake 1: Citing IPC for Post-July 2024 Offences
Reflexively writing “Section 420 IPC” in a complaint or bail application for an offence committed after 1 July 2024 draws immediate registry objections and signals unpreparedness to the bench.
Mistake 2: Using Outdated Document Templates
Law firm templates, court application formats, and complaint proformas drafted before July 2024 still carry IPC references. Update all master documents to cite Section 318(4) BNS for post-transition matters.
Mistake 3: Citing BNS for Pre-July 2024 Offences
The reverse error is equally problematic. Citing Section 318(4) BNS in a bail application for an FIR registered in 2023 is legally incorrect. The substantive IPC provisions continue to govern pre-transition cases.
Mistake 4: Ignoring the Sub-Section Requirement
Merely citing “Section 318 BNS” without specifying sub-section (4) for a cheating-inducing-delivery case is imprecise drafting that can create ambiguity at the framing of charges stage.
Mistake 5: Neglecting the BSA Certificate for Digital Evidence
In cheating cases driven by electronic evidence, failing to promptly secure the Section 63 BSA certificate (previously Section 65B certificate) can make the entire electronic record inadmissible.
Mistake 6: Confusing Civil and Criminal Dimensions
The single biggest ground for FIR quashing in cheating cases is the argument that the matter is a civil dispute dressed as a criminal complaint. Prosecutors must establish dishonest intent from inception; defence counsel must hammer this distinction at every stage.
Practical Tips
These practice-ready tips will sharpen your courtroom readiness under the new regime:
- Keep a ready-reckoner card with key IPC to BNS conversions in your trial diary: 302→103, 376→65, 420→318(4), 498A→85.
- Always check the FIR date first — before drafting any application, confirm the Date of Occurrence to determine whether IPC or BNS applies substantively.
- For hybrid FIRs, cite both sections in your anticipatory bail heading: “Application under Section 482 BNSS r/w Section 438 CrPC in respect of offences u/s 420 IPC and 318(4) BNS.”
- File anticipatory bail early — since Section 318(4) BNS is non-bailable, delay in filing for anticipatory bail can result in unnecessary custody.
- Attack inception malice — the strongest defence in any cheating case is establishing that no dishonest intent existed at the time the transaction was entered into. Gather documentary proof of genuine performance attempts from day one.
- Compound early if possible — Section 318(4) compounding through property restoration is permitted. Move under Section 528 BNSS at the earliest stage if settlement is achievable.
- Leverage the Preliminary Inquiry right — in commercial disputes, demand a preliminary inquiry before FIR registration to resist abuse-of-process FIRs.
- Secure digital evidence certificates immediately — in online fraud cases, the BSA certificate under Section 63 must be obtained from the service provider without delay; providers have deletion schedules.
- Cite BNS section first, IPC in parentheses — when arguing before a Magistrate unfamiliar with the transition, present it as: “Section 318(4) BNS (corresponding to the erstwhile Section 420 IPC)” to assist the court.
- Stay updated on High Court developments — courts across India are rapidly developing new jurisprudence under Section 318 BNS, particularly on cryptocurrency fraud, digital impersonation, and online investment scams.
Final Thoughts
The IPC 420 to BNS Section 318(4) conversion is far more than a change of numbers. It represents a structural realignment of how cheating offences are defined, classified, and prosecuted in India’s modernized criminal justice system. The BNS brings greater clarity through graded sub-sections, explicitly covers digital fraud, mandates fines, and operates within the BNSS framework that emphasizes technology-driven investigation and trial timelines.
For practicing advocates, the learning curve is real but manageable. Master the Golden Rule — offence date determines which code applies. Keep your templates updated. Cite section numbers precisely. And stay ahead of the rapidly evolving High Court decisions that are reshaping the contours of Section 318 BNS in the context of modern financial crimes.
The law has changed. Your practice must adapt alongside it.
