Section 340 IPC: Wrongful Confinement - Definition, Punishment and Case Laws
Section 340 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, defines wrongful confinement, a form of wrongful restraint that prevents a person from leaving a defined area. The corresponding provision is Section 127(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
Original statutory definition: Section 340 IPC
340. Wrongful confinement. Whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits, is said "wrongfully to confine" that person.
Illustrations
(a) A causes Z to go within a walled space, and locks Z in. Z is thus prevented from proceeding in any direction beyond the circumscribing line of wall. A wrongfully confines Z.
(b) A places men with firearms at the outlets of a building, and tells Z that they will fire at Z if Z attempts to leave the building. A wrongfully confines Z.
Meaning and essential ingredients
- Wrongful restraint: The accused must prevent another person from moving as the law permits.
- Circumscribing limits: The restraint must effectively prevent movement beyond a particular boundary or area, not merely block one direction.
- Voluntary obstruction: The obstruction must be voluntary within the statutory definition of wrongful restraint.
- Absence of lawful justification: The facts must not establish a lawful authority or applicable statutory exception.
The boundary need not be a locked door or physical wall. Guards or threats may restrict departure just as effectively. Whether the person was actually prevented from leaving is a question of evidence.
Corresponding current law: Section 127 BNS
Section 127(1) BNS defines wrongful confinement. Section 127(2) BNS punishes ordinary wrongful confinement with imprisonment of either description for up to one year, or a fine up to Rs. 5,000, or both. Other subsections of Section 127 address aggravated forms of confinement, including prolonged confinement and confinement in specified circumstances.
Section 126 BNS separately defines wrongful restraint, corresponding to IPC Section 339. Do not confuse the number of an IPC section with the number of a BNS section.
Punishment under IPC Section 342 and BNS Section 127(2)
| Issue | IPC (historical provision) | BNS (current corresponding provision) |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | Section 340 IPC | Section 127(1) BNS |
| Ordinary punishment | Section 342 IPC | Section 127(2) BNS |
| Maximum imprisonment | One year, either description | One year, either description |
| Maximum fine | Rs. 1,000 | Rs. 5,000 |
| Alternative | Imprisonment, fine or both | Imprisonment, fine or both |
More serious forms of confinement may attract different punishment provisions. The offence date, precise facts, and operative statutory text govern the applicable law.
Wrongful restraint versus wrongful confinement
Section 339 IPC (wrongful restraint) concerns preventing a person from proceeding in a direction in which that person has a right to proceed. Section 340 IPC concerns preventing the person from proceeding beyond circumscribing limits. Blocking one path may constitute restraint; preventing all effective exits from a bounded area may constitute confinement.
Ordinary wrongful restraint is punished under Section 341 IPC; ordinary wrongful confinement is punished under Section 342 IPC. The corresponding BNS provisions are Sections 126 and 127.
Illustrative situations
- Locked room: A person is deliberately locked in a room against their will and cannot leave.
- Guarded exits: Armed guards are posted at every exit and threaten to shoot anyone who attempts to leave, as in the statutory illustration.
- One blocked route: A person is prevented from using one path but remains free to leave by another route; this may involve wrongful restraint without amounting to confinement.
Each example depends on proof of the relevant elements and any lawful justification.
Evidence and legal considerations
Witness accounts, CCTV recordings, communications, access-control logs, photographs, the layout of the premises, and the duration of detention may help establish whether movement beyond a defined area was prevented. Cases involving police custody, arrest, or detention require particular attention to lawful authority and constitutional safeguards.
Historical case-law references retained from the original article
The following citations are reproduced from the original webpage for research continuity. They have not been independently verified for citation accuracy, precedential value or present applicability. Some are older or foreign authorities; confirm the full judgment before citing in court.
- Per Patterson J. In Bird v. Jones (1845) 7 QB 742
- Paran Kusam v. Stuart (1865) 2 MHCr 396
- Mohammad Din (1894) PR No. 36
- Bhagwat 1971 Cr.LJ. 1222
- Shamlal Jairam v. Emperor 4 Bom. LR 79
- Paran Kumar v. Stuart (1865) 2 MHCr 396
- Dhamia v. F.L. Clifford (1888) 13 Bom 376
- The Acting Government Pleader v. Venkatachala Mudali (1881) 1 Weir 341
- Suprosunno Ghosaul (1866) 6 WR (Cr) 88
- Gopal Naidu (1922) 46 Mad 605
- Baistab Charan Shaha (1902) 30 Cal 95
- Shimbhu Narain (1923) 45 All 495
Frequently asked questions
What is wrongful confinement under Section 340 IPC?
Wrongful confinement occurs when a person wrongfully restrains another so that the other person cannot proceed beyond certain circumscribing limits.
What is the punishment for ordinary wrongful confinement under the IPC?
Section 342 IPC provides imprisonment of either description up to one year, or a fine up to Rs. 1,000, or both.
Which BNS section corresponds to Section 340 IPC?
Section 127(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, defines wrongful confinement; Section 127(2) provides punishment for ordinary wrongful confinement.
What is the difference between wrongful restraint and wrongful confinement?
Wrongful restraint under IPC Section 339 prevents movement in a direction in which the person has a right to proceed; wrongful confinement under Section 340 prevents movement beyond circumscribing limits.
Must a person be locked in a room?
No. Physical barriers, guards, or credible threats that prevent leaving a defined area may amount to wrongful confinement if the legal requirements are established.
Does the IPC still apply after 1 July 2024?
The BNS generally applies to conduct from 1 July 2024. The IPC may remain relevant for earlier conduct subject to repeal and savings provisions.
Official statutory sources
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - India Code official text (Sections 126 and 127).
- India Code, Government of India (Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 339 to 342).
- Ministry of Home Affairs (criminal-law commencement and updates).
Updated 30 October 2026. General legal information only; consult the statutory text and relevant judicial decisions for the specific facts and date of the alleged offence.