Section 216 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)

False statement on oath or affirmation to public servant or person authorised to administer an oath or affirmation. 

False testimony is defined as making false statements when under oath or affirmation in Section 216 of the BNS. It proves that people who are legally required to answer truthfully when questioned by a public official or other official are formally obligated to do so. This responsibility is applicable in a variety of legal circumstances because the regulation covers a wide range of officials. 

Any statement that a person knows to be untrue, believes to be untrue or does not believe to be true is considered false. Because of this broad definition, liability may result even from doubts about the truth of a statement. Section 216 aims to uphold the integrity of the legal system by promoting truthfulness and deterring dishonesty in all sworn statements.

Overview of Section 216 of BNS

The provisions of section 216 of BNS prohibit the act of perjury which is defined as the deliberate provision of false information to a public servant or any other person authorized to administer an oath. It also enjoins on individuals the obligation to be truthful in such proceedings and prescribes punishments of imprisonment of not less than three years and also fines which demonstrates the degree of seriousness that is accorded to such matters.

Section 216 of BNS is part of CHAPTER XIII OF CONTEMPTS OF THE LAWFUL AUTHORITY OF PUBLIC SERVANTS in Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

Statement of Section 216 of BNS

“Whoever, being legally bound by an oath or affirmation to state the truth on any subject to any public servant or other person authorised by law to administer such oath or affirmation, makes, to such public servant or other person as aforesaid, touching that subject, any statement which is false and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.”

Meaning of the Statements of Section 216

Section 216 makes it illegal for anyone under oath to make false statements to a public servant or authorised person. If someone knowingly lies, believes their statement is false or does not genuinely believe it to be true, they can face up to three years in prison and fines. This law emphasises the importance of truthfulness in legal settings to maintain the integrity of the justice system.

Key Points of Section 216 of BNS

1. Oath : 

An individual must take an oath, affirmation or any other equivalent legally binding obligation in order to make the statement in formal settings where there is a duty to tell the truth. 

2. False Testimony : 

The essence of the offence is the act of making a statement that is untrue with respect to a particular subject matter while answering under oath.

3. Knowledge of False : 

A person acts with knowledge of the statement’s dishonesty when that person knows it to be a lie, believes it to be a lie or refrains from believing it to be true.

4. Punishment : 

The punishment for violation of this section includes an imprisonment term of no more than three years and a possibility of fine.

Definition of Section 216 of BNS

1. Nature of False Statements:  

The provisions concern only those so-called statements which are misleading in the sense they fail to disclose the truth regarding the subject matter. This involves, for instance, making a statement which one knows to be false or in relation to which one holds no belief as to its truth value.

2. Parameter: 

The false statement or representation has to be made in the presence of or to, a public officer or any other person legally authorized to take sworn statements. This parameter is important because it denotes the official circumstance in which telling lies is prohibited.

Punishment for Breaching the Provisions of Section 216

1. Prison Sentence : 

A person convicted of the crime may be imprisoned for a period not exceeding three years. This lengthy punishment is more than just a means of punishment but is a clear warning against dishonesty emphasising the rule of law and its principle of veracity.

2. Fines : 

Beyond imprisonment, individuals may also be imprisoned as well as faced with other sanctions. The very presence of fines is a clear indication of the degree with which the law in question suffers a different type of impairment, namely restriction of liberty and imposing monetary losses.

Classification of the Offense: Bailable and Non-Cognisable

This section categorises false statements as a bailable and non-cognisable offence. This classification allows the accused the possibility of bail, while a non-cognisable status means law enforcement needs court permission to investigate. These distinctions ensure that the legal proceedings are handled carefully, respecting both the rights of the accused and the integrity of the judicial process.

Legal Obligation to Speak Truthfully

The idea of a legal obligation is what basically Section 216 revolves around. Whenever people are invited to give evidence or make a statement in court, they have to do it under an oath or affirmation. In all honesty, such a pronouncement allows such a person to promise to speak the truth under the fear of possible consequences that a lie may cause. 

The legal system appreciates that people giving evidence in court create the foundation upon which honesty prevails in justice even in the law courts because all the decisions made are based on true evidences without lies.

The Legal Importance of Oaths and Affirmations

An oath or affirmation creates a binding legal obligation of honesty. In other words, an individual taking an oath will bear the duty to speak only the truth and to do anything else would be acting in breach of such legal duty. This practice is important in courtrooms and other formalised settings, including administrative processes where the truthfulness of parties directly affects the decisions and actions of the officials involved.

Importance of Truthfulness in the Legal System

The integrity of the legal system relies heavily on the truthfulness of testimony provided under oath. False statements can lead to a host of negative outcomes, including wrongful convictions, misinformed judicial decisions and a general erosion of public trust in legal institutions. Section 216 acts as a protective measure to mitigate these threats, further strengthening the belief that every participant in legal procedures is required to be honest and truthful.

What is the significance of Section 216 in aiding the sustenance of the independence of the judiciary?

The interaction of parties with the judicial system is based on trust and the use of incorrect information in any proceedings renders it impossible to arrive at a reasonable decision. In this regard, Section 216 is significant because it censors the utterances of people in matters concerning the administration of justice. The uttering of falsehoods jeopardizes particular causes as well as the entire populace’s assurance in the legal system. Section 216 is thus designed to substantiate and assure the honesty of the judicial and administrative processes.

The Importance of Section 216 of BNS in the Current Situation

1. Looking at the Current Importance of Section 216

Section 216 is an important provision of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita that helps to ensure truthfulness in an age of such widespread and available information that can influence thoughts and actions of the society and courts. Oaths can be violative of the judicial process, create fabricated facts and squander time and money. The section provides an underlying principle that every person in such a society has to be truthful so as to maintain fairness in the justice system and governance, which depend on credible information.

2. Reinforcing Confidence in the Justice Administration

The question may be when do people start trusting the legal system. This trust relies on the belief that the court processes and their outcomes arejust equitable and based on facts. Section 216 helps this in that it discourages unwarranted interference into official matters. If somebody is assured that lies will be punished, the faith in the judicial process is elevated and the gap between the people and the justice system is narrowed.

3. Combating the New Faced Problems in Court Testimonies

False statements are serious since the exposure to the public eye of important figures, media and the sociological openness has been advanced. Section 216 covers these aspects of contemporary developments in a legal system by stating that lying or being untruthful is not negotiable regardless of the circumstances. This clause serves to protect the justice delivery system from being abused by those in authority or with otherwise private interests so that justice remains the ultimate arbiter of all disputes.

4. Protecting Accountability and Transparency

As emphasised in Section 216, it also espouses the present demands of ensuring accountability and transparency in all spheres of life especially in the legal and administrative dimension. Due to the severe punishment for lying, for instance, the provision seeks to eliminate any form of behavior that would go behind the scenes for the purposes of corrupting the judicial process. In other words, this kind of responsibility above all aspirations, helps to sustain the ethical system in working environment which is vital for the current fast developing and IT oriented societies. 

5. Building a Society of Truthfulness

More broadly, this section promotes a social order that accommodates truth-telling and prohibits the practice of lying. All these laws are pro honest behavior and they assist in creating averts social norms that are beneficial to all of the peoples. This also reminds us that every claim we make in law should correspond with the realities that exist and warns people against careless regard to the contents of official documents.

Difference between IPC and BNS regarding Section 216 of BNS

Indian Penal Code (IPC)	Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)
In IPC, Section 181 deals with False statement on oath or affirmation to public servant or person authorised to administer an oath or affirmation	In BNS, Section 216 deals with False statement on oath or affirmation to public servant or person authorised to administer an oath or affirmation
It was assented on 6th October, 1860.	It received the assent of the President on the 25th December, 2023.
It came into effect on January 1, 1862.	It came into effect on July 1, 2024.
Statement:Whoever, being legally bound by an oath 3*[or affirmation] to state the truth on any subject to any public servant or other person authorized by law to administer such oath 3*[or affirmation], makes, to such public servant or other person as aforesaid, touching that subject, any statement which is false and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.	Statement:Whoever, being legally bound by an oath or affirmation to state the truth on any subject to any public servant or other person authorised by law to administer such oath or affirmation, makes, to such public servant or other person as aforesaid, touching that subject, any statement which is false and which he either knows or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

Comparison of BNS 216 with IPC 181

Transition from IPC to Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)

The transition from the Indian Penal Code to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita marks a significant shift in India’s legal landscape. Section 216 of the BNS has replaced the earlier Section 181 of the IPC, which also dealt with false statements under oath.The shift is indicative of a contemporary outlook, which seeks to promote understanding and applicability in the existing legal system while ensuring that the primary value of truthful and faithful declarations is preserved.

Similarities Between IPC 181 and BNS 216

The underlying principles within the provisions of section 181 of the IPC and section 216 of the BNS are very similar: both relate to the offence of perjury directed to the officials. Each constitutes the deterrent element in provision of legaladministrative systems from fraudulent claims. The purpose remains unchanged – to prevent people from manipulating the system and caring for the responsibility of the claims made in the course of the proceedings.

Language and Scope Differences

Although section 216 is similar in principle to the provisions of IPC section 181, certain changes in the language and scope have been made in order to strengthen and clarify the law. The language under BNS is different and more straightforward relieving any uncertainties that would have resulted to different meanings under the IPC. Further, any changes in scope tend to focus on the desire to make the law more relevant, akimbo to the realities of the current day ensuring its functionality within the courts of law today.

Changes in Penalties and Enforcement

For both the IPC and BNS, making any false statement is a crime punishable by law; however, BNS Section 216 is likely to provide some new provisions on penalties which will be enforced in a more up to date manner than the current. The latter changes seek to show the new effect of false assertions during legal proceedings with penalties designed to prevent people from sticking their necks out and risking the legal system. The adjusted enforcement is consistent with BNS’s wider vision of promoting a justice system that is effective and responsive to the needs and expectation of the funded sources.

Implications of Section 216 of BNS

1. Legal Accountability :

The fateful promises binding to an individual cannot be taken lightly because such a person knows well that any of his statements does have legal implications. The clause puts an express provision that one must tell the truth and any failure to honor this provision is likely to have fatal repercussions.

2. Discouragement :

The supporting penalties of a three year prison term andor fines are a sufficient deterrence from dishonest actions. Awareness that he cannot tell a lie without bearing the legal consequences of his actions makes him careful and honest in choosing his words while giving out information.

3. Integrity of Legal Proceedings :

This law is very important in ensuring the proper functioning of the legal system. The summary is that when someone is called to give evidence under a legal oath, that person cannot lie and therefore the evidence before the court is believable and this is important in ensuring justice is served in courts of law as well as other legal institutions.

4. Public Trust in the Justice System :

By making it an offense to make false statements, it is possible for Section 216 to enhance the public’s trust in the legal system. There is a certain level of belief that people will not lie in situations common to courts, be it a witness or a participant, which in turn enhances the validity of the outcome reached by a court and helps the public have faith in the law enforcement agencies and the courts as well.

5. Wider Implications for People Involved in Legal Processes :

The relevant prohibition applies to a number of people involved in any legal proceedings, such as witnesses, accused persons and lawyers. They should all be aware of the role in providing information in any legal issue as it can change the course of justice and the rights of the individuals concerned.

6. Potential for Misuse and Misunderstanding :

Good intentions notwithstanding, the provision also has the potential for abuse. People may suffer harsh punishment depending on misapprehension or innocent mistake of his/her statement. This highlights the need for legal advice and assistance when giving evidence.

7. Encouragement of Decent Behavior :

Such of the provisions as the one above are intended to promote a high standard of behavior amongst the stakeholders in the law Courts. The awareness of consequences of being untruthful could also increase the levels of integrity in the practice of law as well as in the culture.

Real World Implication

1. Witnesses and Testimonies : 

Every person who appears in court as a witness should be aware of the significance of the testimony they give. For instance, lying or misleading the court may have consequences to the individual, but it may also endanger the case being prosecuted.

2. Public Trust : 

The respect for the law and ensuring that all representations made in court are true needs to be depicted by the members of the court ‘system’ in order to promote the trust of the public in the justice system. In such a situation where people have faith in the testimony of the given oaths, the whole system of administration of justice is upheld without any doubts.

3. Legal Advice : 

It is very important that people engaging with the law consult appropriate legal counsel where doubt is raised regarding the accuracy of any statements made. Claiming to be misinformed or naive about the law does not absolve one from the law’s consequences.

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: Section 216

Section	216
Offence	False statement on oath or affirmation to public servant or person authorised to administer an oath or affirmation
Punishment	Imprisonment for 3 years and fine.
Cognisable or Non-cognisable	Non-Cognisable
Bailable or Non-bailable	Bailable
By What Court Triable	Magistrate of the first class

Legal Process Involved in Filing Election Accounts

1. Filing a Complaint Under Section 216

In order to file a complaint under section 216 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, one must be aware of the prerequisites and steps to be followed in lodging such a report of the crime. It often happens that the complainant or the public officer has a reasonable cause to suspect that a person made a false statement under oath. Depending on the jurisdiction, the complaint may be filed with law enforcement agency or in court accusing the defamatory party what’s at stake as a result of the foul play. This preliminary step is intended to kick start the judicial process with regard to a specific offense in a form that the glide path for the rendition of accusations is clear and precise as per the allegation presented.

2. Investigation and Collecting Evidence 

The moment an accusation is lodged, the necessary steps to conduct an inquiry are taken and the main objective becomes proving beyond reasonable doubt that the said statement was not truthful at all. Evidence comprises of a cluster of documents oral testimony from bystanders and any other audiovisual materials which may either support or oppose what the accused has already asserted. Investigators also take into account the circumstances that surround the particular statement, looking at all the elements in order to come up with a conclusion. This is an important step, since it lays down the necessary ground work that a trial will be based on to safeguard against the risk of erroneous accusations.

3. Trial Process and Court Proceedings

The actual trial is where the parties are allowed to submit proof, whereby the burthen is upon the prosecution to show that the defendant made the assertion with knowledge of its falsity. After hearing the evidence provided, the arguments from the witnesses, as well as the consideration of any relevant evidence, such as mitigating evidence, the court seeks to determine the case in question. The party that is accused of crimes is allowed to refute the evidence and to give his or her own submissions, so as to achieve equality of arms. The aim of the court is to acquire the information whether the statement contained any false intention and whether it was material in the case.

4. Defenses Available to the Accused

Nevertheless, an array of defenses could be pleaded by the accused under Section 216 depending on the circumstances of the case. The accused may suggest that the statement was made due to a misunderstanding, lapse of memory or negligent mistake and not deliberate falsehood. The courts take such defenses very seriously, especially if the false statement was made under duress, confusion or misapprehension. These defenses ensure that no injustice is meted out to the accused without hearing him out to explain his intentions in making the statement. 

5. Achieving Justice and Impartiality in Courts of Law

The procedural guidelines set forth in Section 216 do not in any way promote the prosecution of false declarations. This logic allows the investigation and trial of only those individuals who are charged with perjury. Where such measures are in place, the administration of justice seeks to place a premium on the discovery of the truth in every trial.

Limitations and Challenges of Section 216 of BNS

While Section 216 of BNS places emphasis on the concern of testifying truthfully and under oath, it does however present certain limitations and challenges. The following are some of the issues that one should contemplate:

1. Different Interpretations

The words used in the provision are subject to different interpretations, which raises doubt as to what is appropriate to refer to as a “false statement.” In most occasions, the line between a genuine error and a willful misrepresentation is quite thin. This can mean that innocent individuals may suffer wrongful punishments when there is no intention to deceive.

2. Subjectivity of Beliefs

The provision refers to certain statements made by a person to be which that person “knows or believes is false” and some which that person does not “believe to be true”. This may make it difficult to conduct legal proceedings since proving the ‘state of mind’ of a party at the time the statement was made proves challenging. This may also result into conflict regarding what was the true meaning behind the said statement.

3. Effects of Stress/Pressure 

Individuals under oath may experience stress or pressure during legal proceedings, which can affect their ability to recall information accurately. This humane aspect casts doubts regarding the reasonableness of punishing a person for any statement given under pressure or in a fluster, regardless of its eventual accuracy.

4. Abuse Potential

The existence of this provision is subject to the risk of its being utilized more for intimidating or silencing the unfriendly witnesses. The fear of any such repercussions is such that it also prevents any would-be witnesses from coming forward or providing critical information.

5. Inconsistencies in Application

The understanding of Section 216 and its application may vary significantly in different jurisdictions and cases. This leads to a risk of injustice and contempt for the legal order as members of society may witness some offences drawing extreme penalties while others are ignored.

6. Dangers of Legal Representation

Defendants charged under Section 216 are likely to face challenges when trying to form a defense, especially those who are charged with knowingly making false statements. Those defending the clients have to struggle with the notions of intent and belief which are crucial for the development of a legal strategy.

7. Proof of Illegality

In the scenarios where a person is alleged to have made a false statement under the criminal justice system, the prosecutor is tasked with the responsibility of proving that the statement was made with knowing falsity. Such a situation is difficult especially when the burden of proof is low in establishing intent causing the risk of erroneous judgment of not guilty or guilty.

8. Understanding Laws and the Social Dynamics

The general people might not have any idea of the consequences of swearing a false statement. This lack of appreciation even makes some people put themselves in danger without knowing that they are making serious pledges.

Case Studies and Judicial Interpretations

Notable Cases Interpreting Section 216 and IPC Section 181

Section 216 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which takes place of IPC Section 181, has provided assistance in a number of well-known cases where certain individuals made false statements under oath. For instance, there were instances where witnesses retracted their original statements or fabricated portions of their testimony, which in turn influenced the judgement rendered by the court. The Courts in all such instances have reaffirmed the position of the witnesses calling for them to testify truthfully and how such testimony is essential to the success of that particular case and to the course of justice as a whole in all other cases.

Judicial Reasoning and Its Emphasis on Integrity

Judges in most cases have indicated the importance of integrity in such cases and as such in cases arising under section 216. For example, it has been held by the courts that in the case of this section even a small exaggeration done with the intent of deception, in any way proven, is very dangerous. Judicial reasoning explained these Injustice do not only lie in its occurrence but also in any attempts to seek misrepresent the court or the investigation will be put in no uncertain terms.

Section 216 in the Context of Legal Testimony and As a Disciplinary Measure

There have also been views from the courts that suggest that the provisions under section 216 has some structures which are aimed at discouraging False Testimony and improving the credibility of evidence, within legal frameworks. Counsel has counselled people ill the past that when one takes an oath, he does not simply do it as a formality; he makes a solemn promise of telling the truth and therefore, any falsification of facts will have its price. In doing this and since there are laws stipulating restrictions and penalties for the breach of such laws, Section 216 becomes a firm warning that no person shall lie for any legal declaration.

How Courts Balance Fair Trials with Strict Penalties

There have also been occasions where the judicial system has been lenient especially when the case involves issues of mitigating factors or mistakes on the part of the offender. There have been, other instances, where the courts looked at the exterior factors on the issue of the fake information and said that the confusion was evident and therefore the mistake was purely circumstantial. However, the courts have been strict with subsection 216 in instances that the untruths have been established to be intentional, as they have lifted penalties so that they are not less than those which will prevent the action from being repeated.

Influence of Judicial Interpretations on Legal Practice

Rights of the parties have both experienced the tendency of the courts to interpret Section 216 very broadly; resulting in the creation of a normative atmosphere where honesty is a necessity in a court of law. Turned out, both lawyers and their clients have become more careful about how they present evidence, especially verbal claims made under oath, as they understand that any blatant lie will be curbed contemptuously by the courts. These interpretations are constructive in increasing people’s faith in the health of the legal system because it makes sure that only relevant truths are used in the court.

Example based on Section 216 of BNS

1. Example of False Statement:

In a courtroom, a person who is a witness to a specific act is called upon to give evidence. The witness, who is under an oath, lies that they saw the accused in the act of committing a crime whereas the truth is that he/she did not. This is a false statement which under Section 216 is tantamount to a basic crime and may earn the offender arrest.

2. Example of Misinformation :

A member of a board is asked to provide evidence of a particular transaction. Still, they think that number is correct without being affirmative. Later when they are put on oath, they quote the figure with assurance but later on find out that it was wrong. If it is found out that the habit instead of the figure was truly believed in, legal punishment may be evaded, but the individual will still have problems in court or otherwise due to the nature of the figure they gave.

3. Example of Stress and Pressure:

A suspect in a police investigation is interrogated and cross-examined under oath. The suspect, feeling enormous pressure and the need to speak, claims that a certain point in time and space does not apply to him, even if he internally is not convinced of this alibi. If it is shown that this was incited by threat and no intention to mislead, the Canadian court may take this into account.

4. Example for Intent to Deceive :

Someone is seeking employment with the government and must disclose any past criminal record, if any. For instance, they will deliberately leave out a prior criminal record and declare under oath having not been previously convicted. Her betrayal may incur criminal prosecution under section 216 which prohibits making a false swearing in court if such information is uncovered or revealed.

5. Example for Abuse of the Provision :

If a witness refuses to provide testimony within a specific period, for example, a lawyer may issue a warning that they could be liable to prosecution for the offence of contempt of a court order as defined in Section 216. Under such threats, the witnesses might choose to lie, as they would be afraid of being charged with perjury because of the threats made to them.

Conclusion

Section 216 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) rightly makes a provision against false statements made under oath during court proceedings. This lies at the very foundation of the justice system and is expected to assure the people of the land about the legal framework existing. However, apart from stressing accountability, it exposes the shortcomings like vagueness and, more importantly, the threat of abuse calling for remedies in order to permit just implementation. 

In effect, Section 216 is a provision showing the limits that may be imposed on the type of conduct that the beholder perceives to be corrupt economic action, thus, emphasizing that justice must also be earned through the objective of truth.

Frequently Asked Questions Based on Section 216 of BNS

Q1. What is the scope of Section 216 of BNS?

Ans1. Section 216 addresses lies told under oath and to a public officer or other authorized persons. It provides for prosecution of persons who willfully tell lies in that context.

Q2. What is a false statement under this section?

Ans2. A false statement includes any unwarranted allegation made under oath with knowledge that it is false, is not entirely believed to be true or without belief in the truth of it. This wide definition encompasses all forms of dishonest practices.

Q3. What is the punishment for contravening Section 216?

Ans3. The maximum punishment for a person convicted of perjury is a term of imprisonment on any three ranks and a fine. The gravity of the offence can be seen from the high level of the penalties.

Q4. Who is concerned by this provision?

Ans4. Any person who gives testimony under order to speak the truth, be it a witness, a defendant or anyone else making a statement to a representative of the state or other competent authorities, falls under the scope of this provision.

Q5. Can misunderstandings or honest mistakes lead to prosecution?

Ans5. The original purpose of the law was to punish willful fraud. However, falsehoods and misunderstandings complicate the proceedings. In case it is ascertained that the individual had a sincere or honest belief that what he was saying was true, he or she may be able to avoid sanctions.

Q6. How does the rule of law get affected by Section 216 of the Constitution? 

Ans6. Section 216 attempts to advance this culture by providing punishment to those who make untruthful statements in court proceedings. In this way, it protects the standards of the admissibility of evidence and therefore the standards of the work of adjudicators.

Q7. What are other issues concerning the use of Section 216?

Ans7. Challenges cover vagueness in the term falsehoods, lack of clarity on what intent may be and abuse of the law especially on the witnesses of the proceedings. These concerns may affect the administration of justice and in particular legal actions and application of the law.

Q8. Why is it of utmost importance to be honest in the course of the law?

Ans8. Being honest is important within the context of law because perjury is associated with wrongful convictions and flawed rulings which undermine public faith in the legal system as a whole, therefore the need for Section 216.

Q9. What should individuals bear in mind while making a statement under oath?

Ans9. Everyone must understand the weight of their words, if not legal consequences. It is recommended to get a lawyer if they are unsure about the information they are about to give, whether it is correct information or whether it is permissible to alter the truth.

Q10. Are there any defenses available for someone charged under Section 216?

Ans10. Of course, available defenses can be proving that the statement was made without intention of lying, that the statement was made in error or even that the speaker believes the statement they made to be true.

Q11. Can individuals be charged under Section 216 for statements made outside of formal proceedings?

Ans11. Generally, Section 216 applies specifically to statements made under oath or affirmation in formal settings, such as court proceedings or official inquiries. Statements made informally may not fall under this provision.

Q12. How does Section 216 impact witnesses in court cases?

Ans12. Witnesses are legally obligated to tell the truth when testifying. Knowing the penalties for false statements encourages witnesses to provide accurate and honest information, which is vital for the justice system.

Q13. What role do public servants play in the application of Section 216 of BNS?

Ans13. Oaths are administered by public servants and authorised officials, who ensure the need for honesty in the statements made. They also assist in maintaining the correctness of the legal process.

Q14. What are the necessary procedures to follow in case someone sees false testimony?

Ans14. Witnessing false testimony can be troubling. If someone believes they have information about false statements made under oath, they may consider reporting this to legal authorities or seek guidance from a legal professional on the best course of action.

Q15. What penalties are imposed under Section 216 for making a false statement under oath?

Ans15. Those found guilty under Section 216 may be sentenced to imprisonment for a duration not exceeding three years and may be liable to pay fines.

Q16. Is making a false statement under oath a bailable offence under Section 216 of BNS?

Ans16. Yes, offences under Section 216 of BNS are considered bailable, allowing the accused to seek bail during legal proceedings.