Legal Provisions of Section 170 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Personating a public servant:
While the preceding four sections 166 to 169 deal with the liability of a public servant for doing certain prohibited acts, sections 170 and 171 of the Code lay down the liability of someone who does not hold a particular office as a public servant, or who does not belong to a certain class of public servants respectively. Section 170 states that whoever pretends to hold any particular office as a public servant even though he knows that he does not hold such office or he falsely personates any other person holding such office, and in that assumed character he either does or attempts to do any act under colour of such office, shall be punished with simple or rigorous imprisonment for a term extending up to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Image Source: cdn.shareyouressays.com
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Pretends
The word ‘pretends’ means alleges falsely, makes believe, ventures, indicates, gives an impression by his actions. Mere pretending to hold some office is not enough; he must also do or attempt to do any act under colour of such office.
Any particular office
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The expression ‘any particular office’ means any specified office. It is not necessary that such office must exist in reality. The office may be real or imaginary. But the accused must give an impression that he holds a specified office which he actually does not hold.
Falsely personates
‘Falsely’ means incorrectly untruthfully, wrongfully or without basis. ‘Personates’ means gives an impression about himself to be another person, real or imaginary, which in fact he is not. In other words, he assumes a character different from his own incorrectly or untruthfully.
Colour of such office
ADVERTISEMENTS:
An act is said to be in colour of office when it has some substantial relation with that office. It must be within the power or duty of that particular office. If an accused pretends to hold a certain office and does an act which is totally unrelated to the nature of the work in that office, the act cannot be said to be done in colour of such office. In Partap Singh v. State of Haryana, the accused identified himself as a Lambardar, a public servant, and attested certain securities. In fact he was not a Lambardar.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that section 170 of the Code is attracted and he is guilty and the expression ‘under colour of his office’ in section 170, need not have direct proximity with the duties of the office of the person impersonated. It is enough that a person pretends to tell others as to what he is when he in fact is not so.
The offence under this section is cognizable, bailable and non-compoundable, and is triable by any magistrate.