Wrongful restraint, wrongful confinement, criminal force and assault

1. Wrongful restraint: section 126

Whoever voluntarily obstructs any person so as to prevent him from proceeding in any direction in which he has a right to proceed wrongfully restrains him (old ss.339, 341 IPC). Ingredients:

• a voluntary obstruction, physical or by threats or show of force; actual touching is not needed;
• which prevents the person from proceeding in some direction; and
• he has a right to proceed in that direction.

Exception. Obstructing a private way over land or water which the accused in good faith believes he has a lawful right to obstruct is not an offence. The illustration: A blocks a path along which Z has a right to pass, not believing in good faith that he may stop it; A wrongfully restrains Z. Punishment: simple imprisonment up to one month, or fine up to five thousand rupees, or both.

2. Wrongful confinement: section 127

Whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent him from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits wrongfully confines him (old s.340). Illustrations: A locks Z inside a walled space; A posts armed men at the exits of a building and tells Z they will fire if he leaves. The boundary need not be a wall; a credible threat that keeps the person within an area is enough, and the confinement may be for a short time.

The punishment rises with duration and purpose:

• s.127(2) (old s.342): up to one year, or fine up to five thousand, or both.
• s.127(3) (old s.343): three days or more, up to three years.
• s.127(4) (old s.344): ten days or more, up to five years and fine of at least ten thousand rupees.
• s.127(5) (old s.345): keeping a person confined knowing that a writ for his liberation has been issued, an extra two years.
• s.127(6) (old s.346): secret confinement, an extra three years.
• s.127(7) and (8) (old ss.347, 348): to extort property, or to extort a confession or compel restoration of property, up to three years and fine.

3. Restraint and confinement distinguished

• Genus and species. Every wrongful confinement is wrongful restraint, but not every wrongful restraint is confinement.
• Extent. Restraint is partial: the person is stopped from going one way but may go any other. Confinement is total within a boundary: he cannot go beyond it in any direction.
• Limits. Confinement needs circumscribing limits; restraint needs none.
• Right of way. Restraint requires that the person had a right to proceed in the direction obstructed. In confinement the question is only whether he was prevented from leaving the area.
• Punishment. Restraint, one month simple imprisonment; confinement, one year, with heavier terms for duration and purpose.
• Exception. The private-way exception applies to restraint. A good-faith claim to block a way does not justify locking a person in.

4. Force: section 128

A person uses force to another if he causes motion, change of motion or cessation of motion to that other, or causes any substance to move so that it comes into contact with the other's body, or with anything he is wearing or carrying, or with anything so situated that the contact affects his sense of feeling (old s.349). The motion must be caused in one of three ways: by his own bodily power; by disposing a substance so that the motion follows without further act; or by inducing an animal to move.

5. Criminal force: section 129

Whoever intentionally uses force to any person, without that person's consent, in order to commit an offence, or intending or knowing it likely to cause injury, fear or annoyance, uses criminal force (old s.350). The illustrations are classic: unmooring a boat so it drifts with Z in it; lashing the horses of Z's chariot; stopping Z's palanquin to rob him; pulling up a woman's veil; pouring boiling water into Z's bath; setting a dog on Z.

6. Assault: section 130

Whoever makes any gesture or preparation, intending or knowing it likely that a person present will apprehend that he is about to use criminal force to him, commits an assault (old s.351). Mere words do not amount to an assault, but words may give a gesture a meaning that makes it one: A takes up a stick saying “I will give you a beating”. Shaking a fist at Z, or beginning to unmuzzle a ferocious dog, is assault.

7. Criminal force and assault distinguished

• Criminal force requires actual use of force; assault requires only a gesture or preparation causing apprehension of it.
• Assault requires the victim to be present and to apprehend force; criminal force can be used on a person who is asleep or unaware.
• Every use of criminal force is usually preceded by an assault, but an assault may never become criminal force.
• Both are punished alike under s.131 (old s.352): up to three months, or fine up to one thousand rupees, or both, if not on grave and sudden provocation.

8. Aggravated forms: sections 131 to 136

• s.132 (old s.353): on a public servant in the execution of duty, up to two years.
• s.133 (old s.355): with intent to dishonour a person, up to two years.
• s.134 (old s.356): in attempting theft of property worn or carried, up to two years.
• s.135 (old s.357): in attempting wrongful confinement, up to one year.
• s.136 (old s.358): on grave and sudden provocation, simple imprisonment up to one month or fine up to one thousand.

Assault and criminal force against women are dealt with in Chapter V: s.74 (old s.354, with intent to outrage modesty), s.75 (sexual harassment), s.76 (with intent to disrobe), s.77 (voyeurism), s.78 (stalking) and s.79 (word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty, old s.509). These sections use the definitions of assault and criminal force given here, which is why the January 2026 paper asked about “criminal force and assault against women” in Unit II.

9. Problem

A, a landlord, padlocks the only door of a room while his tenant T is inside, to force T to pay arrears of rent. T is released after four hours. Discuss.

Issue. Whether A is guilty of wrongful confinement, and of which form.

Law. Section 127(1) covers restraint that prevents a person from going beyond circumscribing limits. Section 127(8) aggravates confinement for the purpose of constraining a person to satisfy a claim or demand.

Application. The locked room is a circumscribing limit and T could not leave in any direction. The short duration does not matter. A's purpose was to make T satisfy a demand for rent, which is within s.127(8). A landlord's claim to rent is a civil matter and gives no right to confine.

Conclusion. A is guilty of wrongful confinement under s.127(8), punishable with up to three years and fine.

How this is examined

January 2026 set a 10-mark question: “Explain wrongful restraint and how it is different from wrongful confinement.” Give both definitions with illustrations, the exception, the aggravated forms of s.127, and a clear list of differences. Short notes: assault; criminal force; or the difference between them.