BACK TO SECTIONS(2000) 4 SCC 168
IPC 1860REPEALED
Section 420
Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property
Replaced by: BNS 318
BailableCognizable: CognizableMagistrate First Class
THE STATUTE
Original Text
Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Simplified
Section 420 is the IPC's most culturally embedded fraud provision — 'Section 420' has become Indian shorthand for any fraud, embedded in popular culture by Raj Kapoor's 1955 film 'Shree 420'. It is the aggravated form of cheating (Section 415), specifically requiring that the deception causes the victim to deliver property or sign/cancel a legal document. The dishonest intent must exist AT THE MOMENT of the representation — a genuine business deal gone wrong is not Section 420. The Supreme Court has repeatedly cautioned against converting civil commercial disputes into Section 420 FIRs without proof of pre-existing fraudulent intent.
Legal Evolution
Post-digital economy, Section 420 prosecutions have exploded to cover UPI fraud, cryptocurrency scams, fake online stores, and matrimonial fraud — always combined with IT Act provisions for digital methods.
Landmark Precedents
Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma v. State of Bihar (2000)
RELEVANCE
Dishonest intent at the inception of the transaction must be proved — non-performance of a promise later does not establish cheating.
Practical Scenarios
"A tour operator who collects full payment for packages but makes no actual bookings and absconds — Section 420."
"Creating a fake online shopping website to collect payment without delivering goods — Section 420."
"A real estate developer who sells 50 flats in a building with no approvals — Section 420."
Common Queries
No — dishonest intent must exist at the beginning of the transaction. A builder who takes a deposit and fails to deliver due to genuine financial difficulties has breached a contract; he commits Section 420 only if he never intended to build from day one.
Yes — UPI fraud, phishing, and online scams are charged under Section 420 alongside IT Act Sections 66C and 66D.
Four ingredients must be proven: (1) dishonest or fraudulent deception of a person; (2) the deception induces the deceived person to deliver property or sign/destroy a valuable security; (3) wrongful gain to the accused or wrongful loss to the victim; (4) dishonest intent must exist at the time of the representation — not after the fact. Non-performance of a promise alone is not cheating without proof of prior fraudulent intent.
Yes — but liability must be established individually. A director can be charged under IPC 420 only if they personally participated in the fraud or had knowledge and abetted it. A director is not vicariously liable merely by virtue of their position. The FIR must specifically allege individual acts of fraud, not just directorship.
Section 415 defines cheating broadly — any deception causing damage or harm. Section 420 is a specific punishment section for the most serious form: cheating causing delivery of property or destruction of a valuable security (7 years max). Section 417 punishes ordinary cheating that doesn't involve property delivery (1 year max). Section 415 is the definitional base; 417 and 420 are the two punishment tiers.
No — IPC 420 is non-bailable and cognizable. Bail can be applied for under Section 437/439 CrPC. Courts regularly grant bail in 420 cases — factors considered include the amount involved, flight risk, nature of the fraud, and likelihood of evidence tampering.
Yes. BNS Section 318 replaces both IPC 415 (definition) and IPC 420 (punishment) in one consolidated provision. Same 7-year maximum, same non-bailable status, same three-element test. The cultural shift: '420' was India's most famous section number for 160 years; legally it is now BNS 318.
Key defences: (1) No pre-existing fraudulent intent — the transaction was genuine at inception; (2) The matter is civil, not criminal — contractual dispute doesn't become fraud without proof of dishonest intent; (3) No damage or loss was caused or likely. The Section 482 CrPC petition to quash FIR is commonly used when 420 is invoked in purely civil disputes.