Imprisonment is a kind of penalty given by the jurisdiction for a certain type of illegal activities. The number of years depends upon the depth of the illegal activity. Today we are discussing the false imprisonment, which is a term used to represent the restriction imposed to a person without jurisdiction or their consent. It is considered as an illegal activity. It may be claimed for private acts or maybe some time for governmental activities. These categories of activities are done when they need to execute a specific purpose. The intention in case of this false imprisonment is a malicious one. Let us consider an example if two persons X and Y doing something together in a room if X doesn’t have the knowledge that Y is present there. If X closed the door of room while Y is still there, he may be liable for the false imprisonment.
If any place where a person is locked for a short or long span of time which place is considered a place for false imprisonment. If someone is trying you to prevent from moving you to some other place which is also considered as false imprisonment. Which can be categorized as intentional false imprisonment, In that any person trying it intentionally to stop anyone from moving to any place which is tagged under this name. If someone is tried to threaten some other person violently which is coming under this tag. Another category is that non – consensual. It is applicable to the major ones it does not apply to the minor one’s they do not have that consent. For more information refer to lawyers in India
There is certain kind of penalties applicable to this false imprisonment; they are imprisonment, Fine and Probation.
Here we are introducing the list of cases that deal with false imprisonment
D.K.BASU v. STATE OF WEST
BHIM SINGH v. STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR
RUDUL SHAH v. STATE OF BIHAR
SEBASTIAN M.HONGRAY v. UNION OF INDIA
File Habious Corpus writ is one type of remedy for the false imprisonment. This writ is one of the important and effective way to dissolution for unlawful detention.
IPC Section 340 deal with the wrongful confinement
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.
IPC Section 339
Wrongful restraint.—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.
IPC section 348
Wrongful confinement to extort confession, or compel restoration of property.—Whoever wrongfully confines any person for the purpose of extorting from the person confined or any person interested in the person confined any confession or any information which may lead to the detection of an offence or misconduct, or for the purpose of constraining the person confined or any person interested in the person confined to restore or to cause the restoration of any property or valuable security or to satisfy any claim or demand, or to give information which may lead to the restoration of any property or valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either des c r i p tion for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Note:- We try our level best to avoid any kind of abusive content posted by users. Kindly report to us if you notice any, email@example.com