TOPIC-CRIMINAL FORCE AND ASSAULT

Introduction
In a county like India, we can always see in the news about crimes regarding battery, assault,
discharge etc, such crimes are very common in our country and happen almost every single
day, one may argue that it happened hourly and because of this, people were facing a lot of
problems, the government had to step in and so they made certain laws that ensured strict
punishment to all those people who committed such crime and thus it reduced to number of
such crimes in our country.

CRIMINAL FORCE

SECTION 129. 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.
INGREDIENTS;
• Intention uses force to any person,
• Such force must have been used without that person’s Consent,
• The force must have been used;
• In order to the committing of an any Offence, or
• With the intention to cause or, knowing it to be likely that it will cause,
• Injury,
• Fear, or annoyance to the person to whom it is used.

• Criminal force is equivalent to battery in English law and it does not include the use of
force against any immovable property or other inanimate objects. It is only concerned
with the use of force on human beings alone. That is, it contemplates on the physical
presence of the person on whom the force is being used. When the lock of the house is
broken in the absence of the occupant of the house, then it can be said that the accused
had taken the possession of the house without any criminal force or show of force.
Hence, the physical presence of a person makes the crucial difference between an act
amounting to criminal force or not.
• It is not necessary that there should be any bodily injury or hurt in order to prove the
use of criminal force. The use of force which causes motion, change of motion or
 cessation of motion to another person, done without the consent of such person, in
order to commit an offence, or cause injury, fear or annoyance to the said person, thus,
will amount to criminal force
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.
CASE LAW
R.V. BANWARI LAL & OTHER (AIR 1976 SC)
In this case, the Supreme Court of India clarified that mere touching or brushing against
another person without the intention to cause harm or create fear of injury does not amount
to criminal force or assault under the IPC . The Court emphasized the need for the accused’s
intention to be established for such offenses.

INDER MOHAN GOSWAMI V. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL (2007)

The Supreme Court clarified that in cases of assault or criminal force, it is not necessary for
the victim to have suffered physical injury. The intention to cause fear of injury or the use of
force that is sufficient to create apprehension of injury may be enough to establish the
offense.

STATE OF BIHAR V. MUSA ANSARI.

Here, the accused forcibly made a 5 – year- old girl touch his penis, causing injury. The court
found him guilty under Section 349,350 ,and 354, and 354 ( Assault or criminal force to a
woman with intent to outrage her modesty), highlighting the use of force and criminal force.

ASSAULT

SECTION 130. Whoever makes any gesture, or any preparation intending or knowing it to
be likely that such gesture or preparation will cause any person present to apprehend that he
who makes that gesture or preparation is about to use criminal force to that person, is said to
commit an assault.

ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS

1. Making any gesture or preparation

Assault must consist display of such gesture, expression, behaviour or preparation of an act
which covey a person about the intention of aggressor
in absence of any gesture or physical expression its most impossible to ascertain whether an
Assault was committed or not.

2. Malafide intention

The person committing an assault must have malafide intention to cause any harm to the
victim, intention is the very fundamental yardstick of criminality.
without any bad intention an assault cannot be committed or punished.

3. Cause reasonable apprehension

such gesture advanced by the aggressor must create some reasonable apprehension in the
mind of the suffer.
an element of fear must be created in the mind of the person to establish assault.

4. Cause fear that criminal force will follow

Such gesture advanced by the aggressor must create some reasonable apprehension in the
mind of the suffer that criminal force will be the most probable consequence of such gesture
or act in order to create an offence of assault.
• Make any gesture,
• Any preparation,
• It will cause any person present to apprehend that he who make that gesture or
preparation,
• Is about to use criminal force to that person,
• Mere word do not amount to an assault,
Explanation.—Mere words do not amount to an assault. But the words which a person uses
may give to his gestures or preparation such a meaning as may make those gestures or
preparations amount to an assault. Illustrations.
(a) A shakes his fist at Z, intending or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby cause Z to
believe that A is about to strike Z. A has committed an assault.
(b) A begins to unloose the muzzle of a ferocious dog, intending or knowing it to be likely
that he may thereby cause Z to believe that he is about to cause the dog to attack Z. A has
committed an assault upon Z.
 (c) A takes up a stick, saying to Z, “I will give you a beating”. Here, though the words used
by A could in no case amount to an assault, and though the mere gesture, unaccompanied by
any other circumstances, might not amount to an assault, the gesture explained by the words
may amount to an assault.

CASE LAW
RUPABATI V. SHYAMA (1958)
The Court held that , causing of same actual hurt is not necessary for constituting assault,
mere threat may constitute assault.
PADARATH TEWARI VS DULHIN TAPESHA KUERI (1932)
The Court held that, a medical examination of a women without her consent constitutes the
offence of assault.
MOHAN KUMAR V. SUPERINTENENT OF POLICE

Petitioner's Argument:
The petitioner argued that the Superintendent of Police was not justified in receiving a
complaint and keeping it unattended without any further action.

Petitioner's Request:

The petitioner requested the court to invoke its inherent powers under Section 482 of the
Criminal Procedure Code.

Case Background:

The case involved a complaint being received by the Superintendent of Police, but no further
action was taken.
Court's Action:

The court did not find it necessary to deal with the merits of the case, but directed the first
respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation, in accordance with
law, as expeditiously as possible, within two months from the date of the order.

JUDGMENT

The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the inaction on the part of the first
respondent in considering the request made by the petitioner vide Ext. P1 to issue proper
orders to the Station House Officer, Kottayi Police Station to remove his name from the
history sheet maintained in the said police station. Admittedly, the petitioner was accused in
various crimes registered against him under the different provisions of law, some of which
also included offence under Section 302 of IPC.
2. The learned counsel for the
petitioner points out that the petitioner has already proved his innocence and that in all the
cases he stands acquitted. The petitioner is stated as leading a very peaceful life and it is No.
longer necessary to continue his name in the list/history maintained in the Kottayi Police
Station.

3. The learned Government Pleader points out that the last crime committed by the petitioner
was in the year 2002. It is true that the petitioner was acquitted in all the cases, but for Crime
No. 37 of 1999 of Kottayi Police Station involving offence under Section 106 of IPC.
It is also pointed out that the co-accused of the petitioner was recently found engaged in
money laundering business and that the activities of the petitioner were also closely watched
in this regard. In response to the submission made by the learned Government Pleader, the
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offence involved in Crime No. 37 of 1999
is only under Section 160 of IPC and that the petitioner has satisfied the fine for the said
offence.
4. Considering the fact and circumstances, this Court does not find it necessary to deal with
the merits of the case, but for directing the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate
orders on Ext. P1 representation, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible at any
rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before
the first respondent for further steps.

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

Punishment for assault or criminal force otherwise than on grave provocation.

SECTION 131. 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 one thousand rupees, or with both.
Explanation 1.—Grave and sudden provocation will not mitigate the punishment for an
offence under this section,— (a) if the provocation is sought or voluntarily provoked by the
offender as an excuse for the offence; or
(b) 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
(c) if the provocation is given by anything done in the lawful exercise of the right of private
defence.
Explanation 2.—Whether the provocation was grave and sudden enough to mitigate the
offence, is a question of fact.
• Imprisonment for 3 months, or fine of 1,000 rupees, or both.
• Non-cognizable
• Bailable
• Triable by Any Magistrate.
Conclusion

Assault is basically the apprehension that the other person is going to get hurt. It is
done to another person with the use of criminal force with the ill will to harm the other
person. People face a lot of problems because of this, especially women. So, it was
inevitable that strict laws regarding Assault and Criminal force had to be put in place
and be implemented properly so that every person is protected by the law. Any person
who assaults any other person by using criminal force, he may be punished or fined, or
both, according to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
REFERENCE

Books and Articles Referred

• Mogha, P.C., The Law of pleadings in India 2017, Eastern House, New Delhi
• Bangia R.K, Law Of Torts, 18th Edition 2005 , Allahabad Law Agency
Allahabad
• B. S. Sinha An Introduction to the Law Of Torts through Indian Cases.

Websites Reference

www.manupatra.in
heinonline.org.
legaldictionary.net
casebriefs.com
www.legalserviceindia.com