Section 33 explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
Section 33 puts a duty on every person who has authority to receive evidence, and on every person in charge of a public office, to look at the stamp on an instrument that comes before him and to impound it if it is not duly stamped. It is the starting point of Chapter IV, which deals with instruments not duly stamped.
Every person having authority by law or consent of parties to receive evidence, and every person in charge of a public office, other than an officer of police, must impound an instrument chargeable with duty that appears to him not duly stamped. He must examine it against the stamp required by the law in force in India when it was executed or first executed. A Magistrate or Judge of a Criminal Court need not examine or impound in proceedings other than those under Chapters XII and XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, and a High Court Judge's duty can be delegated.
Reading section 33
This article follows the consolidated text of the Act consulted (latest amendment shown: Act 13 of 2021); later amendments should be checked. Stamp duty on most instruments is fixed by the law and schedule of the State where the instrument is executed, so the State of execution must be checked. This article explains the central Act only. Section 33 itself prescribes no stamp. It decides who must look for a shortfall and what he must do. The section names the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (V of 1898), which is printed as in the original and has not been brought up to date; the reader should check the current law for the corresponding provision, and no replacement is named here.
For disputes about unstamped documents, our legal dispute resolution team can advise on how an impounded document is dealt with in your matter. For the site's overview, see impounding of instruments not duly stamped.
Sub-section (1): who must impound
"Every person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, and every person in charge of a public office, except an officer of police, before whom any instrument, chargeable, in his opinion, with duty, is produced or comes in the performance of his functions, shall, if it appears to him that such instrument is not duly stamped, impound the same."
Break it into parts.
- Who. Two groups: (i) persons with authority to receive evidence, whether that authority comes from law (such as a court) or from the consent of the parties (such as an arbitrator); and (ii) persons in charge of a public office. An officer of police is excepted.
- When. The instrument must be "produced or comes in the performance of his functions" before him. The duty is triggered by the instrument coming before the officer, not by a complaint.
- Test. The instrument must be chargeable, "in his opinion", with duty, and it must appear to him that it is not duly stamped.
- Action. He "shall ... impound the same". The word "shall" is mandatory. "Impound" is not defined in section 33; section 38 describes what is done with an impounded instrument.
Sub-section (2): what examination means
"For that purpose every such person shall examine every instrument so chargeable and so produced or coming before him, in order to ascertain whether it is stamped with a stamp of the value and description required by the law in force in India when such instrument was executed or first executed."
The test is not what the law requires today. It is what the law required when the instrument was executed or first executed. The officer must check both the value and the description of the stamp. "India" is printed in the sub-section. As noted in the article on definitions, the copy's wording on India and Jammu and Kashmir is not consistent, and the reader should check the current law.
Proviso (a): Criminal Courts
Nothing in section 33 "shall be deemed to require any Magistrate or Judge of a Criminal Court to examine or impound, if he does not think fit so to do, any instrument coming before him in the course of any proceeding other than a proceeding under Chapter XII or Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (V of 1898)".
So a criminal court is at liberty not to examine or impound in most proceedings, but must follow the section in proceedings under the two chapters named. The same two chapters appear in proviso (d) to section 35 and in section 61(1), which are covered in the articles on those sections.
Proviso (b): High Court Judges
In the case of a Judge of a High Court, "the duty of examining and impounding any instrument under this section may be delegated to such officer as the Court appoints in this behalf". The text does not say who that officer is. It leaves the appointment to the Court.
Sub-section (3): doubt about public offices
"For the purposes of this section, in cases of doubt," the State Government, printed as "the State Government" in the copy, may determine:
- (a) what offices shall be deemed to be public offices; and
- (b) who shall be deemed to be persons in charge of public offices.
Any such determination is made under the State's authority. The text consulted contains none, and none is described here.
What happens next
Section 33 stops at impounding. The sections that follow carry the process forward.
| Step | Section | What it says (in brief) |
|---|---|---|
| Special case of small unstamped receipts in audit | Section 34 | The audit officer may require a stamped receipt to be substituted instead of impounding |
| Admission in evidence on paying duty and penalty | Section 35 | An instrument not duly stamped is not admitted, acted upon, registered or authenticated, with provisos |
| What the impounding person sends on | Sections 38, 39 and 46 | Copy and penalty to the Collector, or the original |
| The Collector's powers | Section 40 | Certificate, or duty plus penalty |
The links between the sections mean that section 33 is rarely applied in isolation. If a court officer impounds a lease produced as evidence, the duty and penalty rules of section 35 or the Collector's route under section 40 decide how the lease can be used.
Worked example
In a suit for arrears of rent, Mohan Lal produces a lease deed as evidence. The judge, who has authority to receive evidence, forms the opinion that the lease is chargeable with duty and that the stamp on it is not of the value and description required by the law in force when it was executed. Under section 33 he must impound it. If Mohan wants the lease admitted, section 35 allows admission on payment of the duty and a penalty. If the judge instead sends the original to the Collector under section 38(2), the Collector deals with it under section 40.
Points to watch
- Police. An officer of police is excepted from sub-section (1). The text does not say more about this.
- Opinion. Both "chargeable ... in his opinion" and "it appears to him" are subjective tests framed in the officer's own opinion.
- Date of execution. The stamp is judged by the law when the instrument was executed, so later changes do not affect the examination.
- Registration. Section 35 stops an instrument not duly stamped from being registered. Registration is a separate matter; see documents compulsorily registrable under section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908.
- Current law. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 is printed as in the original; check the current law.
Need help with an impounded document?
If a document in your case has been impounded, the next steps depend on the stage of the matter and the stamp on it. Our team can help plan the response through our legal dispute resolution service, including how the duty and penalty route fits your case.
Key takeaways
- Section 33 requires persons with authority to receive evidence, and persons in charge of public offices, to impound an instrument that is chargeable but not duly stamped.
- An officer of police is excepted.
- The stamp is tested against the law in force when the instrument was executed or first executed, for both value and description.
- A criminal court need not examine or impound in proceedings other than those under Chapters XII and XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 as printed.
- A High Court Judge may delegate examination and impounding to an officer the Court appoints.
Read next
- Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899: instruments not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence
- Sections 38, 39 and 46 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899: what happens to an impounded instrument
- Section 32 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899: the Collector's certificate
- Consequences of not paying stamp duty
Disclaimer: Based on the consolidated text of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 published by the Department of Revenue, whose latest amendment shown is Act 13 of 2021, as consulted on 2 October 2026. Only the central text is covered: stamp duty on most instruments is fixed by the law and schedule of the State where the instrument is executed, and State amendments, rules, notifications and later amendments should be checked. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text before acting.