The term “public interest” is frequently used to refer to the private interest, and it is commonly recognised by law as a distinct exception to the owner’s “Right to exclude.” Trespass is a broad topic that encompasses both civil and criminal aspects. Criminal trespass differs from civil trespass in that the former requires entry with the intent to conduct an offence or to intimidate, insult, or irritate the owner of the property.

Trespass is a civil and criminal offence since it can result in injury, i.e., a breach of legal rights, as well as significant damage to one’s person and property if a physical attack occurs. Trespass law is generally portrayed as a simple notion that protects landowners from opportunistic trespassers enforcing their rights.

Trespassing on another person is a common occurrence in everyday life. It is essentially a form of unjustifiable interference with a person’s body that can be committed either by causing actual harm or by simply inducing fear of force.

People are confronted with trespassing acts on a daily basis, but what is genuinely understood is the nature of the trespassed conduct, property, loss, and impact on the plaintiff. If the act is inherently suggestive of a wrongful incident, willfully done to limit the enjoyment of the right to exclude from private property, all available resources for recouping the harm should be evaluated. Courts should consider the following elements when determining trespass cases under the four factors:

1. The nature of the trespass and its characteristics

2. The protected property’s nature

3. The extent and gravity of the incursion

4. The trespass’s impact on the owner’s property interest.

Kinds of trespass to person

Battery

Battery is defined as the intentional use of force against another person without lawful authority. Its basic needs are as follows:

 a. Force should be used.

b. The same should be true in the absence of any legal authority.

Use of force

Even if the force employed is minor and does no harm, the wrong has been committed. There will be no physical harm. A battering is the least touching of another in anger. Force can be employed even if there is no physical contact with the aggressor. The employment of a stick, bullet, or other projectile to hurl water or split in a man’s face, or to make a guy fall by pulling his chairs, are all examples of using force. A battery would be the infliction of heat, light, electricity, gas, scent, or other noxious substances that might cause physical harm or suffering.

Passive impediments, on the other hand, cannot be termed force.

Without lawful justification

It is critical that the use of force is deliberate and without legal justification. According to Holt, C.J., if two or more people meet in a short path and one softly touches the other without any aggression or intent to damage, it is not a battery. It is, however, a battery if one of them employs violence against the other to force his way in a rude or outrageous manner. Voluntary harm will not be considered a battery. Pulling a drowning man from the ocean, forcibly feeding a hunger-striking prisoner to preserve his life, or performing an operation on an unconscious person by a competent surgeon to save the former’s life may all be justified acts of force.

Assault

Assault is defined as an act by the defendants that gives the plaintiff a reasonable fear of his defendant inflicting a battery on him.

The wrong of assault is accomplished when the defendant’s act produces concern in the plaintiff’s mind that he is going to commit battery against the plaintiff. The wrong consists of attempting to inflict harm rather than harm being caused as a result of the endeavour. It is an assault to point a loaded pistol at another person. Even if the pistol is not loaded, it could be considered an assault if directed at a distance where it could inflict injury if loaded. The question is whether the plaintiff has been given reason to believe that battery will be perpetrated against him. There is no assault if the plaintiff is aware that the weapon is unloaded.

A mere verbal threat is not an assault unless it gives the plaintiff substantial cause to believe that immediate force would be utilised.

The Differences

Assault is an action that makes the victim fearful that an act of battery is about to happen; battery is the act of striking someone with physical force without lawful authority, and mayhem is the act of disabling someone and rendering them defenceless. Both battery and mayhem inflict bodily hurt on the victim, whereas assault normally refers to just the intent to cause harm.

Assault occurs before battery, and mayhem is a particularly extreme kind of battery. All three torts are linked to one another and are a part of both criminal and tort law.

False Imprisonment

False incarceration is defined as the imposition of absolute restraint on another’s liberty for a period of time, however brief, without sufficient lawful justification. It is not necessary to be imprisoned in the traditional sense to commit this crime. False incarceration occurs when a person’s personal liberty is violated, whether by being imprisoned within four walls or being stopped from leaving the location where he is. False incarceration occurs when a man is prevented from leaving his home or an open area by the threat of force.

The following are the main elements that make this wrong:

1. A person’s liberty should be completely restricted.

2. There should be no legal justification for it.

Total Restraint

Whether the constraint is absolute or partial, it is illegal under criminal law. When the restraint is total and a person is prevented from leaving certain circumscribed limits, the offence is wrongful confinement, as defined in section 340 of the IPC. When the restraint is partial and a person is only prevented from going in a particular direction where he has a right to go, the offence is wrongful restraint, as defined in section 33 of the IPC.

Means of Escape

If there is a way out, the restraint cannot be called absolute, and it is not considered false incarceration. However, the means used must be understandable to the individual being detained.

Knowledge of the Plaintiff

There has been some disagreement as to whether the plaintiff’s knowledge of the limitation on his liberty is required to establish the wrong of wrongful imprisonment.

Unlawful Detention

It is necessary for the constraint to be unlawful or without justification in order to establish the crime of false imprisonment.

Lawful Detention

There is no false imprisonment when there is any cause for detaining the person. As a result, if a man entered a location subject to certain reasonable requirements, it is not illegal to prevent him from leaving until those conditions are met.

Conclusion

Trespassing on another person is a common occurrence in everyday life. People face several challenges as a result of these acts, but owing to their ignorance, they do not file trespass to person lawsuits, even though they suffer harm as a result of these interferences. In fact, people in Indian society are so ignorant of their rights that they continue to face hardships without raising a protest. In contrast, the American legal system is so litigious that people bring lawsuits even for petty trespassing offences. Trespass to a person is a concept that is sometimes conflated with other concepts such as negligence. As a result, it is critical to submit the proper lawsuit in order to obtain the proper remedies.

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