FALSE IMPRISONMENT

SUBMITTED TO : MRS. NEHA NIMESH

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

SUBMITTED BY: AASHITA JAIN

00113403817
B.A.L.L.B.(H)
2ND SEMESTER

IDEAL INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND

TECHNOLOGY AND SCHOOL OF LAW
 FALSE IMPRISONMENT
False Imprisonment Consist In The Position Of Total Restraint For Some
Period, However Short Upon The Liability Of Another Without Sufficient Lawful
Justification.
To Constitute This Wrong ,Imprisonment In The Ordinary Sense Is Not
Required .
When A Person Is Deprived Of His Personal Liberty Whether By Being
Confined Within The Four Walls Or By Being Prevented From Leasving The
Place Where He Is It Is False Imprisonment
 ESSENTIALS OF FALSE
IMPRISONMENT

Essentials Required To Constitute This Wrong Are As

Follows

1 There Should Be Total Restraint On The Liberty Of A

Person

2 It Should Be Without Any Lawful Justification

 TOTAL RESTRAINT
Under Criminal Law Whether The Restraint Is Partial Or Total The Same Is
Actionable .When The Restraint Is Total And The Person Is Prevented From
Going Out Of A Circumscribed Limits, The Offence Is That Of Wrongful
Confinement As Defined In Section 340 I.P.C.
When The Restraint Is Not Total And It Is Only Partial And The Person Is
Prevented Only From Going To A Particular Direction Where He Has A Right
To Go It Is Wrongful Restraint As Defined In Section 339,I.P.C.
Under Civil Law The Tort Of False Imprisonment Is Constituted When There Is
A Total Restraint
 MEANS OF ESCAPE
If There Is A Means Of Escape The Restraint Cannot Be Termed As Total And
That Does Not Constitute To False Imprisonment.
Means However Must Be Such Which Are Intelligible ,To The Person
Detained.For Example , If The Captive Is A Blind Man Or A Child He Should Be
In A Position To Locate The Means
The Means Must Also Provide A Reasonable Way Of Gettting Out Of
Detention.If The Window Providing Escape Is So High That There Is Likelihood
Of Injury To The Escaping Person Then Such Mean Is Of No Significance And
The Detention Amounts To False Imprisonment
 KNOWLEDGE OF THE PLAINTIFF

There is no requirement that the plaintiff alleging false imprisonment was aware of the
restraint on his freedom at the time of his confinement, If the person is confined in a room,
with one of the entries known to the plaintiff closed, and the room has more than one entry-
exit door, but the plaintiff has no knowledge about the same, the defendant will still be held
liable. Thus, the person confined does not have to be aware of the confinement or be
harmed by it as it is actionable per se.
 UNLAWFUL DETENTION

In Order To Constitute The Wrong Of False Imprisonment It Is

Essential That The Restraint Should Be Unlawful Or Without Any
Justification . If A Person Is Not Released From Jail After His
Acquittal But Is Continued To Be Detained Thereafter The
Detention Cannot Be Considered To Be Lawful
In Rudul Sah V. State Of Bihar The Petitioner Was Ac Quitted
From The Court In 1968 But Was Released From Jail In 1982
After 14 Years Of Acquittal.The State Justified Detention That It
As For The Medical Treatment Of The Petitioner For His Mental
Imbalance .The Plea Was Rejected And Petitioner Got Rs 35000
Compensation As Interim Measure
 LAWFUL DETENTION

 When There Is Some Justification For Detaining A Person There Is No

False Imprisonment .
 Thus If A Man Entered Certain Premises Subject To Certain Reasonable
Conditions Its Is No Wrong To Prevent Him From Leaving Those Premises
And Unless Those Conditions Are Fulfilled.
 When There Is Volenti Non Fit Injuria On The Part Of Plaintiff The
Defendant Cannot Be Made Liable
 REMEDIES

Action For Damages

Damages In False Imprisonment Are Those Which Flow
From The Detention. The Damages For False Arrest Are
To Be Measured Only To The Time Of Arraignment Or
Indictment. There Is No Legal Rule For The Assessment
Of The Damages And This Is Entirely Left On The Court.
The Grounds For Damages Include Injury To The Person
And Physical Suffering, Mental Suffering And
Humiliation, Loss Of Time Earnings And Interruption Of
Businesses, Medical Expenses Incurred, Injury To The
Reputation Etc.
Writ Of Habeas Corpus
This Writ Is Considered To Be A Golden Remedy By The English
Law. The Supreme Court Of India And High Courts Issue This
Writ Under Article 32 And 226 Respectively. Subject To The
Rules Framed By The High Courts, An Application For Habeas
Corpus Can Be Made By The Person In Confinement Or By Any
Person On His Behalf. The Writ Of Habeas Corpus Is Effective
Means Of Immediate Release From Unlawful Detention,
Whether In Prison Or Private Custody. Where An Unlawful
Detention Is Continuing The Plaintiff May Seek This Writ. This
Writ Is Also Used In Criminal Cases Of False Imprisonment.
Self Help
A Person Who Is Unlawfully Detained May Use Self-help To
Escape Including Reasonable Force So As To Defend Him From
Unlawful Arrest. The Force Used Must Be Proportionate In The
Circumstances. This Is A Risky Recourse Since The Power To
Arrest Is Likely To Depend Upon Not Only In The Commission Of
Offence But In The Alternative, In A Reasonable Suspicion
Thereof. Hence An Innocent Person Who Forcibly Resists May Be
Liable For Battery If The Arrester Had Reasonable Grounds For
His Suspicion.
THANK YOU