false imprisonment

False imprisonment is a form of trespass to the person. The restraint must be total: blocking one route while others are open is not enough (Bird v. Jones, 1845). No prison or physical force is needed; locking someone in a room or a show of authority that makes them submit is sufficient. Under English law the plaintiff need not even know of the restraint at the time (Meering v. Grahame-White Aviation, 1919). It is actionable per se, without proof of damage.

The criminal counterpart is wrongful confinement under s.127 BNS (old s.340 IPC). In India, illegal detention by the police can also be remedied by compensation in a writ petition: in Rudul Sah the Supreme Court awarded damages under Article 32 for a prisoner kept in jail fourteen years after his acquittal.

Example

A shopkeeper who locks a customer in the storeroom on mere suspicion of theft commits false imprisonment, even if no force is used.

In Indian law

• Section 127, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (wrongful confinement; old s.340 IPC)
• Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar, 1983 INSC 85

See also

wrongful restraint · trespass · constitutional tort · habeas corpus

Read more in the study notes

• Assault, battery, mayhem and false imprisonment (Law of Torts)
• Ubi jus ibi remedium and legal damage (Law of Torts)
• General defences in tort (Law of Torts)