Law and You > Criminal Laws > Indian Penal Code > Criminal Force (S. 350)
Section 349 elaborately defines what “force” is and does not by itself constitute an offence. It merely explains what amounts to “force”. Force or use of mere force does not amount to an offence. When the force applied to a person is a criminal force it will certainly amount to an offence. The law relating to criminal force or under what circumstance an application of force would amount to a criminal force is explained under Section 350 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The object of Sections 349 and 350 is to provide a clear understanding about the concept of “force” and “criminal force” for the purpose of other subsequent Sections such as 350 – 358.
Criminal Force:
Section 349:
Force:
A person is said to use force to another if he causes motion, change of motion, or cessation of motion to that other, or if he causes to any substance such motion, or change of motion, or cessation of motion as brings that substance into contact with any part of that other’s body, or with anything which that other is wearing or carrying, or with anything so situated that such contact affects that other’s sense of feeling: Provided that the person causing the motion, or change of motion, or cessation of motion, causes that motion, change of motion, or cessation of motion in one of the three ways hereinafter described:
First.—By his own bodily power.
Secondly.—By disposing any substance in such a manner that the motion or change or cessation of motion takes place without any further act on his part, or on the part of any other person.
Thirdly.—By inducing any animal to move, to change its motion, or to cease to move.
To attract Section 349 IPC, there must be motion or change of motion or cessation of motion of any person; or the causing of motion or change of motion or cessation of motion of any substance affecting another person. The force contemplated in this Section is force against a human being and not against an inanimate object. if any motion, change of motion or cessation of motion, is caused to any property without affecting a human being, there is no use of force, within the meaning of Section 349. “Force” does not contemplate the use of force against inanimate objects. Force does not imply a causing or cessation of motion by personal contacts however the presence of the parties are essential under this Section.
Section 350:
Criminal Force:
Whoever intentionally uses force to any person, without that person’s consent, in order to the committing of any offence, or intending by the use of such force to cause, or knowing it to be likely that by the use of such force he will cause injury, fear or annoyance to the person to whom the force is used, is said to use criminal force to that other.
Illustrations:
(a) Z is sitting in a moored boat on a river. A unfastens the moorings, and thus intentionally causes the boat to drift down the stream. Here A intentionally causes motion to Z, and he does this by disposing substances in such a manner that the motion is produced without any other action on any person’s part. A has therefore intentionally used force to Z; and if he has done so without Z’s consent, in order to the committing of any offence, or intending or knowing it to be likely that this use of force will cause injury, fear or annoyance to Z, A has used criminal force to Z.
(b) Z is riding in a chariot. A lashes Z’s horses, and thereby causes them to quicken their pace. Here A has caused change of motion to Z by inducing the animals to change their motion. A has therefore used force to Z; and if A has done this without Z’s consent, intending or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby injure, frighten or annoy Z, A has used criminal force to Z.
(c) Z is riding in a palanquin. A, intending to rob Z, seizes the pole and stops the palanquin. Here A has caused cessation of motion to Z, and he has done this by his own bodily power. A has therefore used force to Z; and as A has acted thus intentionally, without Z’s consent, in order to the commission of an offence. A has used criminal force to Z.
(d) A intentionally pushes against Z in the street. Here A has by his own bodily power moved his own person so as to bring it into contact with Z. He has therefore intentionally used force to Z; and if he has done so without Z’s consent, intending or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby injure, frighten or annoy Z, he has used criminal force to Z.
(e) A throws a stone, intending or knowing it to be likely that the stone will be thus brought into contact with Z, or with Z’s clothes, or with something carried by Z, or that it will strike water and dash up the water against Z’s clothes or something carried by Z. Here, if the throwing of the stone produce the effect of causing any substance to come into contact with Z, or Z’s clothes, A has used force to Z, and if he did so without Z’s consent, intending thereby to injure, frighten or annoy Z, he has used criminal force to Z.
(f) A intentionally pulls up a Woman’s veil. Here A intentionally uses force to her, and if he does so without her consent intending or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby injure, frighten or annoy her, he has used criminal force to her.
(g) Z is bathing. A pours into the bath water which he knows to be boiling. Here A intentionally by his own bodily power causes such motion in the boiling water as brings that water into contact with Z, or with other water so situated that such contact must affect Z’s sense of feeling; A has therefore intentionally used force to Z; and if he has done this without Z’s consent intending or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby cause injury, fear or annoyance to Z, A has used criminal force.
(h) A incites a dog to spring upon Z, without Z’s consent. Here, if A intends to cause injury, fear or annoyance to Z, he uses criminal force to Z.
This Section provides various illustrations from (a) to (h) and thereby provides a better understanding about the ingredients of the offence. These illustrations talks about situations in which a force is used without consent and use of force to injure, frighten or annoy another.
Of these illustrations, illustration (a) exemplifies motion in section 349; illustration (b) “change of motion”; illustration (c) “cessation of motion”; illustrations (d), (e), (f), (g) and (h) “cause to any substance any such motion”; illustrations (d), (e), (g) and (h) also bring that substance into contact with any part of that other’s body; and illustrations (f) and (g) indicate “others” sense of feeling.
Clause (1) of section 349 is illustrated by illustrations (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g); clause (2) of section 349 is illustrated by illustration (a); clause (3) of section 349 is illustrated by illustrations (b) and (h).
Ingredients of Criminal Force (S. 350):
To constitute the offence of criminal force, the following ingredients are necessary:
- There must be an intentional use of force to any person;
- Such force must have been used without that person’s consent;
- It must have been used:
a) in order to the committing of any offence; or
b) with the intention to cause or knowing it to be likely that he will cause, injury, fear or annoyance to the person to whom the force is used.
Criminal force is concerned with the use of force on a human being alone and not against immovable property or other inanimate objects. The section contemplates the physical presence of the person on whom the force is used.
In Bihari Lal v Emperor, AIR 1934 Lah 454 case, where the lock of a house was broken in the absence of the occupant of the house, then it is clear that the accused had taken possession of the house without any force or show of force.
In Darshan Singh v. Emperor (1941) case, where a person strikes a pot which another is carrying and which is in contact with his body, was held to constitute the offence of criminal force.
Terminology of Section:
Intentional Use:
One of the primary conditions for considering any use of force as criminal force is intentional use of such force. The nature and extent of the offence will depend upon the accused’s intention or knowledge or the likelihood of causing injury, fear or annoyance.
Without Consent:
The word “consent” should be taken as defined in section 90, IPC. There is some difference between doing an act “without one’s consent” and “against his will”. The latter involves active mental opposition to the act.
In R v Donovan [1934] 2 KB 498 case, where the appellant, Mr Donovan, had ‘induced’ the victim to accompany him to his garage, wherein he had proceeded to beat her with a cane in ‘circumstances of indecency’. Mr Donovan argued that the victim had agreed to meet him in full understanding of his intentions, and had given every indication that she was consenting throughout. The Court observed that as a general rule if consent is freely given by a rational and sober person, knowing the nature of the act, it is an answer to an indictment or assault unless the consent is to do bodily injury amounting to mayhem or to acts likely or intended to do bodily harm or to an injury constituting a breach of the public peace. Hence, consent can never be a defence when the alleged act consists of an unlawful act. Likewise mere consent by one who does not know the nature of the act done cannot be consent.
Criminal Force is equivalent to “battery” in English law or under law of torts in India, which means the intentional infliction of force by one person upon another against latter’s consent. The detailed law relating to consent is discussed under Section 90 of IPC.
Commission of an Offence:
Under Section 40 IPC, the word offence means any act punishable under Indian Penal Code. The force must have been used for the purpose of committing an offence.
To Cause or Knowing it to be Likely that he will Cause, Injury, Fear or Annoyance:
The force must have been used with the intention to cause or knowing it to be likely that by the use of such fore he will cause injury, fear or annoyance to the person to whom the force is used.
The word injury here means any harm whatever illegally caused to any person, in body, mind, reputation or property (Section 44).
In Bhupinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 14 Feb 1997 case, snatching of ballot papers from public servants was considered as involving use of criminal force.
In Jashanmal Jhamatmal v. Brahmanand Sarupananda, AIR 1944 Sind 19 case, the Court held that in order to constitute the offence of use of criminal force it is not necessary that the offender had any particular implement in his hand.
In Jadunandan Singh v. Emperor AIR 1941 Pat. 129 case, where a victim is assaulted and his thumb impression taken forcefully on a blank sheet of paper. The Court held that the offence will fall under Section 350. This case deals with the issue of extortion and the use of force to obtain thumb impressions. The case is significant because it establishes that the taking of thumb impressions by force is sufficient to constitute extortion. This case is often cited in Indian courts as a precedent for cases involving extortion and the use of force to obtain evidence.
Punishment For Criminal Force:
The punishment for the offence of criminal force is broadly classified on the basis of involvement of grave and sudden provocation by the other party.
Section 352 IPC:
Punishment for Assault or Criminal Force Otherwise Than on Grave Provocation:
Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation given by that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.
Explanation:
Grave and sudden provocation will not mitigate the punishment for an offence under this section, if the provocation is sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender as an excuse for the offence, or if the provocation is given by anything done in obedience to the law, or by a public servant, in the lawful exercise of the powers of such public servant, or if the provocation is given by anything done in the lawful exercise of the right of private defence. Whether the provocation was grave and sudden enough to mitigate the offence, is a question of fact.
This offence is classified as a non-cognizable bailable, compoundable offence triable by any Magistrate.
Section 353 IPC:
Assault or Criminal Force to Deter Public Servant from Discharge of His Duty:
Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person being a public servant in the execution of his duty as such public servant, or with intent to prevent or deter that person from discharging his duty as such public servant, or in consequence of anything done or attempted to be done by such person to the lawful 80 discharge of his duty as such public servant, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 358:
Assault or Criminal Force on Grave Provocation:
Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person on grave and sudden provocation given by that person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees, or with both.
Explanation: The last section is subject to the same Explanation as section 352.
Conclusion: