Section 126: Punishment for Wrongful Restraint

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita • Chapter VI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body • Official Statutory Text & Legal Guide

Chapter VI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body
Any Magistrate
Bailable
Cognizable
Formerly Sec 341 IPC

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 126

Section 126 defines and penalizes Wrongful Restraint, providing that whoever voluntarily obstructs any person so as to prevent that person from proceeding in any direction in which that person has a right to proceed, wrongfully restrains that person, punishable with imprisonment up to one month, or fine up to five thousand rupees, or both.

  • Obstruction of Movement: Preventing a person from moving in a particular direction in which they have a legal right to go.
  • Partial Obstruction Only: Leaves open other directions of movement (distinguishing it from total wrongful confinement).
  • Private Land Exception: Express Exception: obstruction of a private way over land or water which a person in good faith believes they have a lawful right to obstruct is NOT wrongful restraint.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • S.A. Aziz v. Pasam Hari Babu (2003) 3 SCC 427: The Supreme Court affirmed that wrongful restraint under Section 339/341 IPC (Section 126 BNS) requires an intentional physical barrier to a person's lawful movement; bona fide property boundary assertions fall within the statutory exception.
  • Lallu Manjhi v. State of Jharkhand (2003) 2 SCC 401: Affirmed that blocking public thoroughfares during protests constitutes wrongful restraint of citizens.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In road-block or village boundary disputes where your client blocked a pathway across their own agricultural field under a claim of private ownership, invoke the Section 126 BNS Exception: an honest assertion of private land rights excludes criminal restraint.