Introduction:

False Imprisonment is the intentional confinement of the plaintiff by another within fixed boundaries without legal justification. In other words, the tort consists in intentionally putting a total restraint on the liberty of a person, for however shot a time, without lawful justification. To constitute a tort, there reed not be actual imprisonment in the ordinary sense. Every confinement of a free man is an important whether it is in a common prison or in a private house or in a mine or in a vehicle.

Essentials:

1. The defendant must have acted with the intent to confine or restrain the plaintiff: X, the owner of a department store, having finished the day’s work thought that all people had gone. X locked the building and went away. In fact, one store girl Y was still in the store and Y had to stay inside for the whole night. X could not be held liable for false imprisonment since there was no intent; X was proceeding reasonably in conducting his own affairs. The intent of X in locking the building was to keep people out and not to lock them in.

2. The confinement has to be total: Partial restraint of movement does not constitute the tort, mere blocking of one direction or confinement of three sides with the fourth side an available exit, is not false imprisonment. But available means of escape must be reasonable and should not expose one to the risk of injury to person or property. For example, jumping into water to escape from a ship is not reasonable means of escape.

3. The restraint may be a physical barrier or it may consist of threats of force which intimidate or coerce the plaintiff to comply with orders.

Thus, X is robbing a sore with a gun. As he is leaving, he tells the cashier and the patrons not to leave for ten minutes or he will shoot them. The patrons do not leave or test whether X is still outside this would be exposing themselves to grave physical danger. The confinement is complete without testing its totality.

The confinement need not be for any great length of time to be effective. The tort is complete even with a brief restraint of the person’s freedom.

4. A refusal to liberate a person from voluntary confinement is not false imprisonment if there is no legal duty to liberate such person.

5. If the plaintiff reasonably but mistakenly believes himself to be confined and the defendant has intentionally placed him in such a position, there is false imprisonment.

6. It is no tort to prevent a man from leaving your premises if he does not fulfill a reasonable condition subject to which he entered the premises.

7. When a person is being arrested whether by a policemen or anybody else, he must normally be told the reason of his arrest. Failure to comply with this requirement of law makes the arrest a false imprisonment.

8. When a private person makes a lawful arrest, the arrested person should be brought before the magistrate or handed over to police within a reasonable time and not necessarily immediately. 

Conclusion:

False imprisonment may be because of malicious intention of the defendant or by negligence but the sufferer is the plaintiff, hence while awarding the compensation one must keep in mind about the place of confinement, time of confinement and force used by the defendant. The above mentioned considerations will make sure that the aggrieved person gets fair justice.

False imprisonment also violates Article 21 of the Indian Constitution which includes right to life and personal liberty. Any person who is wrongfully imprisoned can take legal action against the wrongdoer for the violation of their fundamental right. Under Article 21 we have the fundamental right to move freely, if any person is restraining the fundamental right then he can be sued in a court of law.

Aishwarya Says:

I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.

If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.

Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter  Youtube and Instagram.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com

We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.

We are also running a series Inspirational Women from January 2021 to March 31,2021, featuring around 1000 stories about Indian Women, who changed the world. #choosetochallenge