The Constitution of India has given its citizens the right to move freely in any direction of the country. Under article 19d of the Constitution of India, this right has been shown to every citizen. But it is often observed in the cases of criminal law that someone restrains the right to move freely in any direction. The right to move in any direction is protected under section 341 of the Indian Penal Code. The matters related to restraining and confining are related to legal consultation. In this article, we will try to see an overview of section 341 of IPC.
What is wrongful restraint under section 399 and Section 341?
Under section 399, wrongful restraint is defined as “Whoever voluntarily obstructs any person 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.” in the Indian Penal Code. Whereas section 341 IPC (of the Indian penal Code) talks about the punishment which is to be given in case of wrongful restraint of the person.
- The main reason behind the formation of section 341 IPC and section 399 is to ensure the freedom of individuals and to protect them against wrongful restraint in their movement.
- To comprise the wrongdoing of carrying out unjust restrictions, the individual who was denied their freedom should confront a deterrent as per section 341 IPC and section 399 IPC.
- Other than that, the individual who confronted the block should feel that they are denied or not given admittance to continue towards the heading they wanted to continue in any case as per section 341 IPC and section 399 IPC.
- The last and principal part, which is expected for it to be known as wrongdoing, is that the casualty should reserve the option to continue towards the ideal heading in any case as per section 341 IPC and section 399 IPC.
Illustrations of Section 341 IPC and Section 399 IPC
- Arihant was working toward the coffee cafe shop; meanwhile, Tanya deliberately came and obstructed the path of Arihant and did not allow him to make sure that he reached the coffee shop.
- The analysis of this example shows that Arihant has the right to pass and go to the coffee shop without any restraint in his way, but as soon as we see that Tanya restrained him, it will be considered as a wrongful restraint, and punishment will be given under the section 341 IPC.
- Satsang was on the roof, repairing the TV cable in the house of Raj Prateek but was able to come down from the roof after the repair work was done because the ladder was removed by Raj Prateek.
- The analysis of this example shows that although there was no direct restriction on the movement of Satsang in any direction, he was bound to be on the roof, as it was impossible for him to come back on land. In this case, as per section 341 IPC, punishment will be given for wrongful confinement to Raj Prateek.
The exception to the section 341 IPC
Even the definition given in section 399 of IPC wrongful restraint is defined in detail. However, there is an exception to it if a person does any act of restrain in good faith, then it will be considered as an exception to section 341 IPC.
- A girl at a university was stopped from going inside the classroom by the security guard present there as there was a snake trapped inside the classroom.
- This is an exception to section 399 IPC and section 341 IPC as the restriction on her way to move in the direction of the classroom by the security guard was in good faith in order to protect her from any unfortunate snake bite event.
Punishment for Wrongful restraint under section 341 IPC
As per section 341 IPC, it is given that whoever wrongfully restrains any person or individual from moving in any direction will be punished with simple impressment for a term which may or may not extend to A period of 1 month or fine up to 500 rupees or both.
Section 341 and its Constitutionality
- The word restraint implies that the individual’s freedom has been compromised despite his desire to the contrary, and that makes it unique. the sec
- Among numerous different reasons, a fundamental purpose for carrying out this arrangement was on the grounds that the Constitution of India accepts the Right to Opportunity of free movement of each and every person in this country all through the region of India; that’s what section 341 IPC and Section 399 IPC talks about.
- It is vital, and that is the justification for why our Constitution has taken care of such privileges by giving Article 19 and Article 21 as the two these articles ensure that each resident of the nation will partake in the Right to Individual Freedom and protect it section 341 IPC and section 399 IPC is given.
Uncertainty is an idea that makes it simpler for us to lay out a legitimate arrangement of regulations relying upon the circumstance, and to that end, we can say that freedom isn’t outright that’s why section 341 IPC is given, and punishment to be given anyone committing section 399 IPC.
Section 341 IPC talks about the issues of Wrongful restraint and not allowing the individual to move in any direction of their choice. Section 341 IPC talks about the punishment given to the individuals committing the crime of wrongful restraint, but section 399 of the Indian penal Code talks about the definition of the and the illustration of it. The subject matter of the cases under section 341 IPC is related to legal consultation. Cases under the 341 IPC are mostly bailable, and the term for punishment is for one month of imprisonment or a fine up to 500 Rupees or both, depending upon the fact of the case.