Skip to main content

section 258 of IPC

 Name: Neha

Semester: II

PRN: 20010224113

BATCH: 2020-2025



Indian penal code is the official criminal code of India. It came into force in 1860. It was enacted by the Imperial legislative council. It is a broad code studied to cover all considerable aspects of criminal law. 

Section 258 of IPC says about the sale of counterfeit government stamps, it means fraudulent imitation of government stamps. 


Section 258 is related to the sale of counterfeit government stamps, it says that any person who sells or offer to sell any stamp issued by government of India for the purpose of earning revenue shall be punishable for imprisonment of seven years or more and will also be liable for some amount of fine.

The seller of counterfeit government stamps is exactly comparable to the dealer of counterfeit coins which is punishable under sec. 239 of the code. In this person is punished with imprisonment of either description of the term which can also extend for five years and shall also be liable to fine. 

This section co-relates with section 243 and deals with the same offence, that is the same applicable to the counterfeited stamps. Section 243 talks about possession of Indian coin by person who knew it to be counterfeit when he became possessed thereof. It is to be understood and clarified that mere possession of counterfeit stamps will not amount to any offence in IPC. It will convert in offence if it is used to an intended imposition upon the general people or public which is practised by using it as authentic stamp or disposing of it to another as a counterfeit stamp who was either to pass it off or use it as an authentic stamp. The punishment for this mentioned under Section 255 of the IPC, which talks about Counterfeiting government stamp. Punishment is imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which can be extended to ten years and shall also be liable for fine.

Illustration 1:

Mr. Kisan Lal vs. Mr. Mohan

There was a vendor, Mr. kisan Lal who had sell some stamps to the customer, named Mohan, Mohan gave him Rs. 1000 in return of that stamps. He gave those stamps to one of his friend, Mr. Kashyap Yadav, being aware of the facts and laws he found that these are the stamps are counterfeited (means fake copies) had been made and was sold by Mohan for purpose of earning revenue.

So, Mr. Kashyap Yadav talked to his friend, Mohan and told him about the section and the crime Mr. Kisan Lal made. He taken him to his attorney and he advised him to sue Kisan Lal for his offence under section 258 i.e. counterfeiting government stamps. On the advise of his council he filed the suit against vendor. On being sued and being presented in the court Mr. Kisan argued by saying that he had purchased all the stamps from the treasury but after the research the register was not showing any such purchases. It was believed that accused has “knowledge” and “reason to believe” that the stamps were counterfeit. 

Later on, Mr. Kisan Lal was proven guilty under section 239 and was liable to pay the fine in the court and was also punished with imprisonment for seven years. 

Illustration 2:

Nikhil Chopra vs. Mr. Dev Prasad

Mr. Nikhil Chopra, student of National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra. He talked to some of his friends and joined them with himself. The essence of the charge was that all of them conspired, started making plans and agreed to do the unlawful act of counterfeiting Government stamps. They all planned together to make some copies of fake stamps and wanted to sell those in market on less rates for earning some sort of money. 

They did the same, made some copies and started selling them in the market. One of the customer, Mr. Dev Prasad purchased 5 copies of stamps from there and pasted the same of the some legal papers. Shri M.G. Devshayam, who was working as S.D.M. Jagadhari noticed that some counterfeit court-stamps had been used on some court papers. He was called in the court, he proved that these stamps were purchased from that Mr. Nikhil Chopra. Mr. Dev Prasad filed a suit against him, he was presented in the court he was found in possession of the counterfeit stamps and was also found in the possession of instruments and other materials intended to be used for the purpose of counterfeiting stamps. 

After looking all the facts and evidences judgement had been given that Mr. Nikhil Chopra being the owner of the group was proven guilty under section 258 of IPC and was sentenced for three years of prisonment and were also liable to pay Rs. 500 in the court under section 239 of IPC. 


Popular posts from this blog


  LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY: LEXIS AND COMPANY, renowned for its excellence in the legal field, is thrilled to announce an exceptional internship and trainee opportunity for aspiring final year law students and newly enrolled Advocates. This highly coveted internship  and trainee opportunity  is a paid position, providing a remarkable platform for career growth and experiential learning in a corporate environment. Eligibility: Only for final year Students and Newly Enrolled Advocates. We are offering a limited number of vacancies, designed for law students and newly enrolled advocates in the dynamic world of the legal profession. This is an immediate joining opportunity, available to candidates who are interested to work in the area of commercial and civil litigation and have interest towards drafting, and legal research. As a team member at  LEXIS AND COMPANY,  you will refine your research and drafting skills while witnessing the meticulous professional conduct expected

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and instruct

Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1)

   Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) --- PLEASE READ THE COMPLETE JOB DESCRIPTION BEFORE APPLYING ---   Urgent Hiring for: LAW STUDENTS/CS STUDENTS/ FRESHER LAW GRADUATES/ FRESHER CS. Position: Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) Department: Legal. Firm Name: LEXIS AND COMPANY – LAW FIRM. Location: Janakpuri, New Delhi. CTC: RS 5000/- Per Month. Additional Allowance: All official expenses including travelling allowance for official purposes will be paid from the day 1 of the service with the firm.   We are urgently looking for LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS for the position of Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) for our Law Firm in Janakpuri, New Delhi.   Eligibility: Mandatory Qualification: Any LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS who wants to learn as a beginner. Desired Qualification: Any additional qualification  will be pre