Introduction
Trespass to the person means a direct or intentional interference with a person's body or liberty.Trespass to person is one of the very few torts which are still relevant in spite of the development of the tort of negligence, which covers any unreasonable act causing foreseeable harm to another. The trespass to person is based on the principle that any direct invasion of a protected interest from a positive act is actionable subject to justification. The principle has been limited further by the courts to exclude unintentional or reasonable acts. The researcher intends to focus on the tort of false imprisonment in this project. False imprisonment is a wrong in common law and a tort. It is also found in the criminal law and is dealt with in the Indian Penal Code under the topic “wrongful confinement”. In India, even constitutional remedies are available against false imprisonment.
Literature Review
The tort of false imprisonment is restraining someone in a limited area without her consent or justification. It applies even to governmental detention. The IPC deals with false imprisonment under the topic of “wrongful confinement” from s.339 to s.348. The restriction with respect to any good is also considered to be false imprisonment.
The Constitution of India gives immense importance to the rights relating to an individual’s personal freedom. The significance attached to the entire spectre of individual rights by the Constitution is self-evident. It is in this context, the tort of false imprisonment is ideally placed. Article 21, providing for the right to life and personal liberty, is a crucial provision. The intention is to protect the life and liberty of the people from the arbitrary acts of the executive. The impris...
... middle of paper ...
... , the knowledge of imprisonment was held to be of no consequence to the fact of false imprisonment. As held in Grainger v. Hill , “if the deprivation of liberty is complete it amounts to an imprisonment and need not be confinement in prison” for example, a person restrained from leaving his house or ship, or a detaining a person on the street without his consent. In Parankusam v. Stuart , the court held the defendant liable for false imprisonment, for issuing a false letter to the plaintiff asking him to present before the Magistrate. The tort often comes to the aid of prisoners, because it has been held that a prison official should not hold a prisoner beyond his term or place him in a wrong part of the prison or with a wrong class of prisoners . Such an act by the official is beyond his official authority and hence would lead to liability for false imprisonment.
time in detention camps. How far the principle of this case would be extended before plausible reasons would play out, I do not know." (pg. 1389).
When an offender is sentenced to imprisonment, post sentencing considerations must be made based on an evaluation of the individual and this will determine the manner in which the prison sentence is served. Post sentencing considerations include security classifications, parole and continued detention orders. These offer different levels of incapacity, accessibility of rehabilitation programs and incentives for good behaviour, and are implicated in order to achieve justice through upholding the rights of the victim, the offender and the wider community.
The “pains of imprisonment” can be divided into five main conditions that attack the inmate’s personality and his feeling of self-worth. The deprivations are as follows: The deprivation of liberty, of goods and services, of heterosexual relationships, autonomy and of security.
The United States Supreme Court, in Howes v. Fields, rejected a per se rule that questioning a prison inmate in a room isolated from the general prison population about events occurring outside the prison is custodial interrogation. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution requires that a person in “custodial interrogation” be read Miranda rights, those rights which come from the case of Miranda v. Arizona. The Sixth Circuit affirmed, holding that a prisoner is in custody within the meaning of Miranda if the prisoner is taken away from the general prison area and questioned about events that occurred outside the prison. The Sixth Circuit held that the interview of Fields in the room was a “custodial interrogation” because isolation from the rest of the prison combined with questioning about allegation outside the prison makes such an interrogation custodial per se. The term “custody” refers to circumstances where the danger of coercion is present. A court will look to the objective circumstances of the interrogation to find whether a person is in custody. In order for statements made ...
were not previously seen, such as hostile or mistrustful attitude towards the world, social withdrawal, feelings of emptiness or hopelessness, a chronic feeling of threat, and estrangement.” Although psychological issues develop in anyone incarcerated, those discussed are particular from the perspective of a victim wrongfully accused. From the moment an innocent individual enters the criminal justice system, they are pressured by law enforcement whose main objective is to obtain a conviction. Some police interrogation tactics have been characterized as explicit violations of the suspect’s right to due process (Campbell and Denov, 2004). However, this is just the beginning.
The integrity of the body and the sanctity of the mind can exist on the foundation that each individual possesses an inalienable ability and right to preserve a private space in which the human personality can develop. Without the ability to make choices, the inviolability of the personality would be in doubt. Recognizing a zone of privacy is but an acknowledgment that each individual must be entitled to chart and pursue the course of development of personality. Hence privacy is a postulate of human dignity itself. In that zone of privacy, an individual is not judged by others. Privacy protects the individual from the searching glare of publicity in matters which are personal to his or her life. Privacy attaches to the person and not to the place where it is associated. Privacy constitutes the foundation of all liberty because it is in privacy that the individual can decide how liberty is best exercised and so it overlaps with it . Individual dignity and privacy are inextricably linked in a pattern woven out of a thread of diversity into the fabric of a plural culture. In Dr MehmoodNayyarAzam v State of Chhattisgarh , this Court noted that when dignity is lost, life goes into
"Prison Legal News - Legal articles, cases and court decisions." Prison Legal News - Legal articles, cases and court decisions. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 May 2014. .
Solitary confinement is a penal tactic used on inmates who pose a threat to themselves or other inmates. Solitary confinement is type of segregated prison in which prisoners are held in their cell for 22-24 hours every day. If they are allowed to leave their cell, they will silently walk shackled and in between two guards. They can only leave for showers or exercise. Their exercise and shower are always done alone and inside. They can exercise in fenced in yards surrounded by concrete. Solitary confinement is either used as a punishment for prison behaviors, a protection method for targeted inmates, or a place to keep prisoners who are a threat to the general prison population. Many prisoners are put in Administrative Segregation for their protection. Many prisoners in this type of segregation are teenagers, homosexuals, and mentally ill prisoners. Many mentally ill prisoners are sent to solitary confinement because there are not rehabilitation services available, and prison officials have run out of options (Shalev, 2008, p [1-2]). Solitary confinement is a convenient method for prison systems, but the detrimental effects on inmates make it an unsuitable option for inmate control.
Legal issues: Whether the defendant is liable or not for restricting the plaintiff’s freedom to contact attorney or family under “false imprisonment?” In addition, as per “assault and battery tort law,” Is it legal for the defendant to treat the plaintiff without her consent? And, does the defendant’s act was unprofessional with the plaintiff under
All the laws, which concern with the administration of justice in cases where an individual has been accused of a crime, always begin with the initial investigation of the crime and end either with imposition of punishment or with the unconditional release of the person. Most of the time it is the duty of the members of constituted authorities to inflict the punishment. Thus it can be said that almost all of the punishments are an act of self-defense and an act of defending the community against different types of offences. According to Professor Hart “the ultimate justification of any punishment is not that it is deterrent but that it is the emphatic denunciation by the community of a crime” (Hart P.65). Whenever the punishments are inflicted having rationale and humane factor in mind and not motivated by our punitive passions and pleasures then it can be justified otherwise it is nothing but a brutal act of terrorism. Prison System: It has often been argued that the criminals and convicted prisoners are being set free while the law-abiding citizens are starving. Some people are strongly opposed the present prison and parole system and said that prisoners are not given any chance for parole. Prisons must provide the following results: Keep dangerous criminals off the street Create a deterrent for creating a crime The deterrent for creating a crime can be justified in the following four types Retribution: according to this type, the goal of prison is to give people, who commit a crime, what they deserved Deterrence: in this type of justification, the goal of punishment is to prevent certain type of conduct Reform: reform type describes that crime is a disease and so the goal of punishment is to heal people Incapacitation: the...
... of Rights." Fundamental Constitutional Rights as a Criminally Accused Person. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Dec. 2013. .
Therefore, when discussing why the Council of Corrective Detention does not need substantial means of physical restraint to keep its prisoners from escaping- it is crucial to realize that the prisoners are held by psychological binds. The prisoners, raised in the totalitarian regime of The Council, cannot even begin to conceive the very notion of escape. Furthermore, the inaction of the prisoners is a representation of the lack of purpose of the citizens of Anthem. One who has purpose, would find it extremely easy to escape, as proven by the example of Equality 7-2521, who virtually walked out of the Palace of Corrective Detention unscathed. The prisoners of The Palace of Corrective Detention in Anthem are trapped within themselves, and this is the fundamental reason why they do not even attempt to escape.
for youngsters who have a long history of convictions for less serious felonies for which the juvenile court disposition has not been effective” (qtd. in Katel).
When a person violates a criminal law, society’s traditions generally demand that society should take some action against the person: an arrest should be made. In order for a police officer to make a lawful arrest he must have probable cause to justify the detention of a suspect. An arrest generally involves a person being taken into custody, where the person is not allowed to leave freely. Afterward, the accuser is taken to a local jail facility where the person is booked (Aberle, 2014).
VonHofer, H. and R. Marvin. Imprisonment Today and Tomorrow: International perspectives. The Hague, The Neatherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2001. Print.