Trespass

Written by - Khushi Maheshwari

Introduction

It is common to witness people wanting to safeguard their bodies and possessions, both moveable and immovable. People are frequently concerned that their person or property would be subject to negative elements prepared to misappropriate and exploit their wealth in a Mala Fide manner. This apprehension of vast portions is what must be dealt with by the law's iron fists.

The law deals with activities that must be repaid by compensation or penalty. These behaviours might range from a simple intended touch to a malicious aim of intruding into one's property without assigning any explanation for the intrusion.

The law is frequently used and has evolved to achieve a delicate balance between private rights to the exclusion of others and socially important public and private interests that are occasionally served by allowing unlawful access. As a result, pinpointing the exact problem and finding a remedy becomes critical.

Meaning

Trespass is defined as an action that goes beyond the legal boundaries. It is a deliberate and unreasonable interference with one's person or property. The term "intention" implies that the wrong was done with purpose. If the interference is with one's or another's body or private property, a trespass charge might be filed.

Types of Trespass

1. Trespass Against Person

It is the fear of excessive interference with one's person and body, as well as that of a third party, and it involves the use of force that causes bodily damage and impairment. With the motive of causing unjust loss or gain, the trespasser violates another's right and alters it with the goal of causing wrongful loss or gain, as the case may be. Even if the perpetrator had no knowledge that the property belonged to someone else, it is considered intentional.

Assault

It is the instillation in another person's mind of an irrational fear of bodily harm and damage, which is frequently a precursor to a battery. It can be used to make certain behaviours and

indicators appear to be suggestive of another's assault. It is possible for it to be both direct and indirect. It can be done by the person themselves or by a third party.

Here, an important aspect of foreseeability creating apprehension is required, as it is necessary to be able to imagine that something is causing unjustified anxiety after viewing it. Assault is defined in Section 351 of the Indian Penal Code.

Battery

The use of force against another individual without legal justification. Battery is defined as intentionally or unintentionally touching another person in a hostile or against his will manner, whether directly or indirectly. Slapping a person is an example of direct force, but placing a dog behind a person or spitting on a person is an example of indirect force. According to Section 350 of the Indian Penal Code, battery is defined as the "use of criminal force."

The following are some of the most important aspects of a battery:

• Without lawful basis, direct or indirect physical contact is prohibited.

• Using force.

• It must be voluntary

False Imprisonment

False incarceration occurs when someone's freedom is unlawfully restrained from all feasible directions in order to prevent him or her from travelling in a particular direction for any length of time, however brief. Wrongful confinement is defined in the Indian Penal Code.

Article 22 of the Indian Constitution protects citizens from unlawful arrest and requires the government to follow proper procedures when carrying out arrest-related activities. If the offender is a proclaimed habitual offender and is alleged to be liable for a cognizable and non-bailable offence, Section 43 of the CrPC allows a private person to arrest him or her.

2. Trespass Against Property

• Trespass against movable property like goods - It is the act of unjustly or forcibly interfering with another's property. Trespass to goods varies from trespass to land in one essential way: trespass to goods does not need malicious intent or negligence. A challenge to ownership of goods amounts to conversion, which is distinct from trespass to goods, as illustrated by the damage of goods delivered by the plaintiff in a railway cloak room, which was thrown and damaged instead of being given.

• Trespass against immovable property like land -Trespass is primarily a violation of possession, although it can also be used against the owner. “The correct position in law may, in our opinion, be slated thus: in order to establish that the entry on the property was with the intent to annoy, intimate, or insult, the Court must be satisfied that causing such annoyance, intimidation, or insult was the goal of the entry,” the court said in the case. If a trespasser is in settled possession of a property, no one has the authority to remove him, and he cannot be removed unless due procedure is followed. The possession that a trespasser has the right to protect against the legitimate owner must be a settled possession that has lasted for a long time and has been accepted by the genuine owner. A careless act of possession would not have the consequence of interfering with the legitimate owner's possession.

CASE LAWS ON TRESPASS

1. Sentini Cermica P. Ltd. Vs Kunchi Krishna Mohan and Ors

Statutory Authority: A search and seizure on the appellant's property does not constitute trespass. Any operation carried out on the property to discover the truth will not be considered as an act of trespass if the technique is carried out with sufficient legal backing.

2. Samira Kohli Vs. Dr. Prabha Manchanda and Anr

The doctor's unauthorised invasion of a patient's person, which resulted in a hysterectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy, can be interpreted as an attack and resultant battery. Her agreement was required because she was an adult, and while the doctor operated in the best interests of the patient, which might be deemed mitigating factors to lessen compensation, the patient is entitled to the compensation in the interests of justice.

3. Rajinder Kumar Malhotra vs. Indian Bank & Ors

Petitioners were granted a licence to operate kiosks through an auction, but their right to do so was revoked by the government corporation when the licence time expired. The court distinguished between a licence and a lease in this case, holding that a licence does not confer possession, and that the authority has the option to cancel the licence and evict the petitioner if any irregularity or discretionary behaviour prompts them to do so. A lease gives the person to whom it is granted a possessory, inviolable, and settled right, but a licence is on a different level. Trespassing on leased land requires legal explanation and an argument of public need. A licence, on the other hand, does not confer ownership or possession rights on the person to whom it is granted. As a result, trespassing on the land does not constitute a violation of the petitioner's right.

4. Bavisetti Venkat Surya Rao v. Nandipati Muthayya

Plaintiff owed the defendant a particular sum that he was unable to pay. In order to retrieve the money, the defendant planned to go to plaintiff's house and sell some personal property. The defendant hired a goldsmith to assess the value of gold in plaintiff's home, but the person standing near the house at the time of the evaluation borrowed the money from someone else to provide it to the defendant, and after the defendant had taken the money, the plaintiff sued him for assault. It was decided that there was no assault because the defendants said and did nothing when the Goldsmith arrived, and the threat of the Goldsmith using force against the plaintiff was too remote a possibility to have put the plaintiff in fear of urgent or instant harm.

5. Bird v. Jones

The claimant attempted to pass through the enclosure, but the defendant blocked his way with two police officers, preventing him from proceeding further into the field. He was told he could only travel backwards, not forwards. After attempting to push through for half an hour, the Claimant assaulted the Defendant and was arrested.

The court ruled that forcing someone to stay in a spot, exactly as locking them in a room, constitutes false imprisonment. There isn't even a need to touch. Even if it is illegal to stop them, it cannot be a false imprisonment to prevent them from continuing ahead by enabling them to return the way they came. If he is threatened or handled as he tries to get past, he will very certainly suffer a wrong, but not false imprisonment, and maybe assault or battery. As a result, it was determined that there was no unjust restriction or imprisonment in this case.

Conclusion

People are confronted with trespass on a daily basis, but it is critical to fully comprehend the nature of the trespassed act, property, loss, and impact on the plaintiff. If the act is inherently suggestive of a wrongful incident, willfully done to limit the enjoyment of the right to exclude from private property, then all available remedies for recouping the harm should be evaluated. The four tests require courts to consider the following factors when deciding trespass disputes: (1) the nature and character of the trespass; (2) the nature of the protected property; (3) the amount and substantiality of the trespass; and (4) the impact of the trespass on the owner's property interest.

Trespass can be an ongoing tort in nature, for example, if a person plants a tree on his property and the branches fall into the defendant's property, it can be considered a continued trespass until the tree is cut down. In the event that such a tort occurs, a remedy in the form of damages or injunctions can be obtained. In the tort of continued trespass, injunctions play a significant role. The Justification Clause is a major defence to such an act.

Criminal trespass, on the other hand, looks at the defendant's state of mind, which plays an important role in gaining a conviction. A guy is said to intend to carry out the inevitable implications of his actions. As the researcher demonstrated in the previous chapters, if a person points a gun towards another person and pulls the trigger, it can be assumed that the person intended to shoot the person.