Wrongful Restraint and Wrongful Confinement: Meaning, Essentials & Punishments

Sections 126 and 127 of the BNS (Section 339-348 of the IPC) deal with offences that restrict a person’s liberty of movement, either wholly or in part. These provisions closely relate to the constitutional guarantee of freedom of movement under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India, which assures every citizen the right to move freely throughout the territory of India.

Wrongful Restraint

Section 126(1) BNS/Section 339 IPC– Definition

Whoever voluntarily obstructs any person so as to prevent that person from proceeding in any direction in which that person has a right to proceed, is said wrongfully to restrain that person.

Exception - If someone obstructs a private way over land or water under the good faith belief that he has a lawful right to do so, it does not amount to an offence.

Punishment - Whoever wrongfully restrains another person shall be punished with simple imprisonment up to 1 month, or with fine up to ₹500, or both.

Essential Ingredients of Wrongful Restraint

1. Voluntary Obstruction of a person.
2. The obstruction must prevent movement in a direction in which the person has a lawful right to proceed.

Key Principles of Wrongful Restraint

• “Physical obstruction by mere verbal prohibition constitutes wrongful restraint.”
• Physical presence of the accused is not always necessary; what matters is the obstruction of a lawful path. Examples :
• A and B occupied a house. During their temporary absence, the accused put a lock on the outer door, preventing them from entering. Here, accused guilty of wrongful restraint since entry was obstructed.

• Obstruction of person only come within the purview of this section
• Obstruction to a vehicle alone does not constitute 'wrongful restraint' as there is no obstruction to the human body.

Lawful Right to Proceed

In Vijay Kumari Magee v. Smt. S.M. Rao – The complainant’s hostel room was locked after the managing committee cancelled her allotment, preventing her entry. She alleged wrongful restraint. The Supreme Court held that no offence was made out, wrongful restraint exists only when a person is obstructed from proceeding in a direction where they have a legal right. Since her allotment was cancelled, she had no right to enter, hence no wrongful restraint.

Wrongful Confinement - Section 127(1) BNS/Section 340 IPC

Whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits, is said "wrongfully to confine" that person.

Wrongful confinement - A special form of wrongful restraint

It means restraining a person in such a manner that they cannot proceed beyond certain circumscribing limits. In short, it is total restraint of movement within fixed boundaries.

Essential Ingredients of Wrongful Confinement

1. Wrongful restraint of a person
2. The restraint must prevent movement beyond certain circumscribing limits

• If the person has some reasonable way to escape, it is not confinement (may only be restraint).

Circumscribing Limits

The circumscribing limits may be physical (walls, locked doors, barriers) or by threat (guards, firearms, intimidation).

Punishment - Imprisonment (simple or rigorous) up to 1 year, or Fine up to ₹1,000, or Both.