Section 345: Using a False Property Mark

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita • Chapter XVIII: Of Offences Relating to Documents & Property Marks • Official Statutory Text & Legal Guide

Chapter XVIII: Of Offences Relating to Documents & Property Marks
Any Magistrate
Bailable
Non-Cognizable
Formerly Sec 482 IPC

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 345

Section 345 penalises using a false property mark, punishing anyone who marks any movable property or case/package with a mark in a manner reasonably calculated to cause it to be believed that the property belongs to a person to whom it does not belong.

  • Property Mark: A distinctive mark used for denoting that movable property belongs to a particular person.
  • False Application: Applying the mark falsely to goods, bales, or cases.
  • Likelihood of Deception: Reasonably calculated to cause it to be believed that the goods belong to someone else.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Sumat Prasad Jain v. Sheojanan Prasad (1973) 1 SCC 56: The Supreme Court clarified the distinction between trademarks (indicating trade origin) and property marks (denoting ownership/belonging), holding that false property marks deceive buyers as to title.
  • Dau Dayal v. State of U.P. AIR 1959 SC 433: Held that applying false property marks on manufactured goods to deceive customers into believing they are genuine products of a reputed firm constitutes a penal offence.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

Examine the design similarity between the genuine mark and the seized mark. Defence can establish that the mark was an independent design adopted without deceptive intent.