Offence of Wrong restrain and confinement

Introduction 

Articles 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution grant everyone the right to freedom of movement and personal liberty throughout the country. In order to achieve the Constitution's goal, the Indian Penal Code establishes penalties for anybody who infringes on another's freedom of movement or personal liberty. Wrongful Restraint and Wrongful Confinement are defined under Sections 339 and 340 of the Indian Penal Code, respectively, to protect a person's right to liberty from deprivation by another individual or organisation other than the state. Wrongful restraint and confinement are punished under Sections 339 to 348 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Section 339

Whoever voluntarily obstructs another person's ability to move in any direction in which that person has a right to move is said to be unfairly restraining that person.

Furthermore, the clause contains an exception, which states that if a person thinks in good faith that he or she has a lawful authority to obstruct and therefore obstruct a private way over land or water, it is not illegal.

Essentials:

To prove the crime of unlawful restraint, the plaintiff must show all of the following:

That there was an impediment.

That the obstruction barred the complainant from moving in any direction.

That the person/complainant who was proceeding in that direction must have a right to do so.

Section 340

Wrongful confinement is defined as the act of wrongfully restraining a person in such a way as to prohibit that person from progressing beyond certain circumscribing limits.

Essentials

The following are the essential elements of the unlawful confinement:

The accused should have wrongfully restrained the complainant (i.e. all elements of wrongful restraint must be present). 

The purpose of such wrongful restraint was to prevent the complainant from going beyond certain circumscribing limits beyond which he or she has the right to go.

Section 341

The perpetrator under Section 339 is punished under Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code with either simple imprisonment for a term of up to one month or a fine of up to five hundred rupees, or both.

The offence is classified as Cognizable, Bailable, and Triable by any Magistrate under this clause, and it is also compoundable by the person restrained or confined.

Section 342

According to Indian Penal Code Section 342, Whoever illegally confines any person shall be punished by imprisonment of either description for a time not exceeding one year, or by fine not exceeding one thousand rupees, or by both. This offence is classified as cognizable, bailable, and triable by any Magistrate. It's also compoundable by the person confined with the permission of court.

Section 343

Whoever unlawfully confines any person for three days or more shall be punished by imprisonment of any sort for a time up to two years, or by fine, or by both. This offence is classified as Cognizable, Bailable, and Triable by any Magistrate additionally, it is Compoundable by the person detained with the court's approval.

Section 344

Whoever wrongfully confines a person for ten days or more must be punished by imprisonment of either kind for a term that may extend to three years, as well as a fine. This offence is classified as Cognizable, Bailable, and Triable by any Magistrate; additionally, it is Compoundable by the person detained with the court's approval.

Section 345

Whoever keeps any person in wrongful confinement knowing that a writ for that person's release has been duly issued shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term that may extend to two years, in addition to any other term of imprisonment to which he may be liable under this Chapter. ” This offence is classified as Cognizable, bailable and triable by Magistrate of First Class. It is non-compoundable.

Section 346

Whoever wrongfully confines any person in such a way that the confinement of such person is not known to any person interested in the person so confined, or to any public servant, or that the place of such confinement is not known to or discovered by any such person or public servant as hereinbefore mentioned

In addition to any other punishment that he may be subject to for such improper confinement, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term that may extend to two years. This offence is classified as Cognizable, Bailable, and Triable by a Magistrate of the First Class, as well as Compoundable by the person confined with the court's permission.

Section 347

Whoever wrongfully confines any person for the purpose of extorting property or valuable security from the person confined or any person interested in the person confined, or of forcing the person confined or any person interested in such person to do something illegal or give any information that may facilitate the commission of an offence, is guilty of extortion.

Shall be punished by imprisonment of either kind for a term of up to three years, as well as a fine.” Any Magistrate may recognise, bail, and try this offence because it is Cognizable, Bailable, and Triable. It is also non-compoundable.

Section 348

Whoever unjustly limits any individual to coerce from the individual bound or any individual keen on the individual restricted any admission or any data which might prompt the discovery of an offense or wrongdoing, or to oblige the individual restricted or any individual inspired by the individual restricted to re-establish or to cause the reclamation of any property or important security or to fulfill any case or interest, or to give data which might prompt the rebuilding of any property or significant security, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years and the wrongdoer shall also be liable to fine. This type of offence is Cognizable, Bailable, triable and non-compoundable by any Magistrate.