âLaw Masterâs Publicationâ âWrongful Restraint & Confinementâ Prof. Santosh D. Bhosale 111
IV]
I]
Distinction Between Wrongful Restrain and Wrongful Continent
INTRODUCTION:-
S. 339 to S. 348 deal with the offences where a manâs freedom of motion is
interfered with wholly or partially. In a situation where a person is prevented from going
to a place where he has the right to go, it is the offence of wrongful restraint defined
under S 339 and made punishable by S 341. But if he is confined within particular limits
against his desire to go outside that limit, it is the offence of wrongful confinement as
defined in S. 340 and made punishable by S. 342. Ss 343 to 348 are aggravated forms of
wrongful confinement.
II]
WRONGFUL RESTRAINT:-
1) Definition:-
Whoever voluntarily obstructs any person to prevent that person from proceeding
in any direction in which that person has the right to proceed is said wrongfully to restrain
that person (S. 339).
2) Punishment:â
Imprisonment up to 1 month or a fine up to Rs. 500 or both (S. 341).
3) Exception:-
The obstruction of a private way over land or water, which a person in good faith
believes himself to have a lawful right to obstruct, is not an offence within the meaning of
this section.
Illustration
A obstructs a path along which Z has a right to pass. A not believing in good faith that he
has a right to stop path Z is prevented from passing. A wrongfully restrains Z.
4) Ingredients:-
a)
Voluntary Obstruction of a Person:-
The obstruction must be such as to prevent that person from proceeding in any
the direction in which he has the right to proceed.
From Proceeding in any Direction in which he has the Right to Proceed:-
b)
Facts -The complainant, his wife, and daughter occupied a house, and during their
temporary absence, the accused put a lock on the outer door, thereby preventing them
from entering.
Held - that the accused was guilty of wrongful restraint.
III]
WRONGFUL CONFINEMENT:-
1 (1910)