Section 342 IPC: Punishment for Wrongful Confinement
Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), prescribes punishment for wrongfully confining a person. The definition is contained in Section 340 IPC. Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), the corresponding definition and basic punishment appear in Sections 127(1) and 127(2).
Original statutory text: Section 342 IPC
342. Punishment for wrongful confinement. Whoever wrongfully confines any person shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
The provision states the punishment. To understand what constitutes the offence, read it with the definition in Section 340 IPC.
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.
Wrongful restraint is separately defined in Section 339 IPC. In wrongful confinement, the restriction effectively keeps a person within certain limits, rather than merely obstructing one particular route.
Statutory illustrations under Section 340 IPC
- A causes Z to enter a walled space and locks Z inside. Z cannot proceed beyond the walls. A wrongfully confines Z.
- A places armed persons at the exits of a building and tells Z they will shoot if Z tries to leave. A wrongfully confines Z.
These illustrations show that confinement may arise through a physical barrier or a coercive threat; physical contact is not always necessary.
Current law: Section 127 BNS
Section 127(1) BNS defines wrongful confinement in terms corresponding to the earlier IPC definition. Section 127(2) BNS provides the basic punishment: imprisonment of either description for a term up to one year, or a fine up to Rs. 5,000, or both.
Other subsections of Section 127 address specified aggravated circumstances, such as longer periods of confinement or particular purposes. The appropriate subsection depends on the facts proved.
Punishment comparison: IPC and BNS
| Particulars | Section 342 IPC | Section 127(2) BNS |
|---|---|---|
| Offence | Wrongful confinement | Wrongful confinement |
| Maximum imprisonment | One year | One year |
| Type of imprisonment | Either description | Either description |
| Maximum fine | Rs. 1,000 | Rs. 5,000 |
| Alternative sentence | Imprisonment, fine, or both | Imprisonment, fine, or both |
These are statutory maximums, not mandatory sentences. Sentencing and any other applicable offences depend on the established facts and governing law.
Essential ingredients of wrongful confinement
- Restraint: The accused wrongfully restrains another person.
- Defined limits: The restraint prevents the person from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits.
- Absence of lawful justification: The restraint must be wrongful; lawful detention or another valid legal authority must be distinguished from unlawful confinement.
- Voluntary conduct: The obstruction must satisfy the relevant statutory requirements for wrongful restraint and confinement.
A person's mere presence in a room or building does not by itself establish the offence. The prosecution must establish the unlawful restriction of movement and the other necessary ingredients.
Wrongful restraint and wrongful confinement: key differences
| Question | Wrongful restraint | Wrongful confinement |
|---|---|---|
| IPC definition | Section 339 | Section 340 |
| IPC punishment | Section 341 | Section 342 |
| BNS equivalent | Section 126 | Section 127 |
| Nature of restriction | Prevents movement in a direction the person is entitled to take | Prevents movement beyond defined limits |
| Example | Blocking a lawful path | Locking a person inside a room |
Related aggravated confinement provisions
The IPC separately provides for wrongful confinement for three or more days (Section 343), ten or more days (Section 344), confinement despite a liberation writ (Section 345), secret confinement (Section 346), confinement for extortion or illegal acts (Section 347), and confinement to extort a confession or compel restoration of property (Section 348). The corresponding BNS provisions are consolidated principally in Section 127.
Practical illustrations
- Locked premises: A person intentionally locks another in a room without lawful justification, preventing departure.
- Guarded exits: Guards prevent a person from leaving an enclosure through threats of force.
- Lawful custody: A detention authorised and carried out according to law is not automatically wrongful confinement; the legal authority and manner of detention matter.
Evidence and legal considerations
Relevant evidence may include eyewitness accounts, messages, CCTV footage, door or access-control records, police documents and proof of the duration and circumstances of the restriction. Where detention by public authorities is alleged to be unlawful, constitutional protections and the relevant criminal procedure law may also be material.
Questions of cognizability, bail, compoundability and trial procedure must be assessed using the procedural law and schedule applicable to the particular offence and date; they should not be assumed solely from the IPC section number.
Frequently asked questions
What is the punishment under Section 342 IPC?
Imprisonment of either description for up to one year, or a fine up to Rs. 1,000, or both.
What is wrongful confinement under IPC?
Section 340 IPC defines wrongful confinement as wrongfully restraining a person so as to prevent that person from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits.
Which BNS section corresponds to IPC Section 342?
Section 127(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, provides the basic punishment for wrongful confinement. Section 127(1) defines the offence.
What is the penalty under BNS Section 127(2)?
Imprisonment of either description for up to one year, or a fine up to Rs. 5,000, or both.
Does wrongful confinement require a locked room?
No. Confinement may result from physical barriers, guards, threats or other circumstances preventing departure beyond defined limits.
How is wrongful confinement different from wrongful restraint?
Wrongful restraint prevents movement in a direction in which a person has a right to proceed; wrongful confinement prevents departure beyond circumscribed limits.
Can a person be confined without physical contact?
Yes. A credible threat or guarded exits may prevent a person from leaving, depending on the evidence and legal ingredients.
Does the BNS apply to events before 1 July 2024?
The IPC remains relevant to earlier acts under applicable savings and transitional provisions; the BNS generally governs conduct occurring on or after 1 July 2024.
Official statutory references
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - official India Code PDF (Section 127).
- India Code - Government of India (Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 339-348).
- Ministry of Home Affairs (criminal-law commencement and official notifications).
Updated 30 October 2026. General legal information only. The date of the alleged act, the facts and applicable law determine the legal position.