Skip to main content

Concept of Force under Indian Penal Code

 Concept of Force under Indian Penal Code


By Shweta Nair


The word ‘Force’ may convey different meanings in different fields of study. For example, in

physics, it is said that force = mass x acceleration.

For the lay-man, force might mean exerting physical compulsion or pressure on another. The

IPC has given its own definition of the word.

Section 349 defines force as-

A person is said to use force to another, if he causes to that other,

Or if he causes to any substance, so as to bring that substance into contact with that other’s

body, or anything which that other is wearing or carrying or anything so situated that affects

that other’s sense of feeling,

Provided that the person causing, causes in one of the three ways hereinafter described:

- By his own bodily power

- By causing to any substance

- Or by causing to any animal.

It is to be noted that Section 349 is a defining section. The substantive section is laid down in

Section 350.

Section 350 states that,

Whoever intentionally uses force to any person, without that person’s consent, in order to the

committing of an offence, or intending by the use of such force to cause, or knowing it likely

that by the fear or annoyance to the person to whom the force is used, is said to use criminal

force to that other.

Criminal Force = Force + Without Consent + Offence or Injury/ Fear/ Annoyance +

Intention/Knowledge.

Section351 then defines Assault as follows:

Whoever, makes any gesture or preparation intending or knowing it likely that such gesture

or preparation will cause any individual present to apprehend that he who makes that gesture

or preparation is about to use criminal force to that individual, is said to commit an assault.


Illustration 1: A is passing through a secluded lane. B looks at her and threatening by twirling

his moustache. B has committed assault.

Illustration 2: X shakes his fist at Y. X has committed assault.

Illustration 3: P menacingly sharpens her knife all the time glaringly at Q. P has committed

assault on Q.

The offence of assault and criminal force and the punishment therefore will vary and increase

depending upon the object with which it is done.

The simplest punishment in cases without provocation would be imprisonment up to 3

months or fine of Rs. 500 or both.

The same offence if done with intent to dishonour a person, to commit theft, to deter a public

servant from doing his duty or to wrongfully confine a person would attract higher

punishment.

Special attention needs to be given to Section 354 which talks about assault or criminal force

with intent to outrage the modesty of a woman.

The framers of the IPC have not defined ‘Outraging the modesty of a woman’ probably

because of the fact that it would be very difficult to comprehensively define the meaning

thereof and therefore to give a wide scope to the term, there is no definition in the IPC.

However, this also leads to a situation where the section is prone to abuse or misuse.

One of the famous cases of Section 354 is Rupan Deol Bajaj v. K.P.S. Gill.

Instances of brushing against woman in crowded places or pawing at a girl in a bus or train

would all be covered under Section 354.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more