ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Srilekha Raman is a 1st year law student at Tamil Nadu National Law University, Trichy. 

FOR INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITIES – https://chat.whatsapp.com/KggJw4ztRa3CYIxtRxbHp9

INTRODUCTION

Picture this: you are in a heated argument with your friend, and they say something unbelievably absurd or something provocative. You’re frustrated and react with a slap to their cheek. 2 days later, you receive a legal notice stating that you’ve been sued by them. What now? Don’t fret, read this article.  

Arguments are very common and understandably, people get frustrated. But where do we draw the line? What is legally acceptable and what is not, especially when it comes to reacting negatively in such situations? How does the law and the Courts view such reactions? Does intention matter? These are some questions that every law student and lawyer should be able to answer, and this blog aims to address these exact questions in detail.  

This article will cover both, civil and criminal consequences of such actions and defences by discussing case laws and other examples. 

LIABILITY UNDER CIVIL LAW 

Under civil law, i.e. tort law, slapping an individual will amount to trespass to persons. Trespass to persons refers to wrongs committed which affect the personal safety and freedom of the individual. There are 4 forms of trespass to persons namely assault, battery, mayhem and false imprisonment. This blog will limit its discussion to the first 2, i.e. assault and battery. 

There is a need to understand the differences between the two as they can lead to completely different charges and penalties.  

Assault 

Assault refers to an unlawful attempt to do bodily hurt or harm to a person, coupled with present ability and intention to do the act. The essence of the tort of assault is to put an individual in present fear of violence. So, the requirements would be – immediate intention to carry out the threat and reasonable apprehension of immediate injury or violence to the individual. 

 However, a mere verbal threat without an immediate intention to injure is not assault, i.e. the present ability of the individual to carry out the threat is required. It was held in Stephens v. Myers ¹ that if a person advancing in a threatening manner to use force is intercepted from completing his actions his act nevertheless amounts to assault.  

In Venkata Surya Rao v. Nandipati Muthayya ², the plaintiff was an agriculturalist who had arrears in land revenue. The village munsif, responsible for collecting the money, went to the plaintiff’s house and asked for the money. The plaintiff pleaded his inability to pay the money and the defendant had told the plaintiff that on his failure to pay, his movable property would be distrained. The defendant had called the goldsmith to distrain the earrings of the plaintiff. 

 However, on the arrival of the goldsmith, the money had been paid by another individual. The defendant left silently and the plaintiff sued him for assault. It was held that since the defendant, after the arrival of the goldsmith, said nothing and did nothing and the threat of use of force by the goldsmith to the plaintiff was too remote a possibility to have put the plaintiff in fear of immediate or instant violence, there was no assault. 

Battery 

Assault to becomes battery when there is intentional application of force against another without lawful justification. Physical hurt is not necessary, only application of force is required. Battery does not include assault in every situation. The important ingredient for battery is – application of force without lawful justification. 

If battery is without reasonable apprehension of force or harm on the part of the plaintiff, then battery does not include assault. For example, a blow from behind inflicted by an unseen assailant is battery without assault.  

In Hurst v. Pictures Theatre Limited, ³ the plaintiff had been forcefully ejected by the manager of the theatre due to a misunderstanding that he had not purchased the ticket. Upon a suit for trespass to persons, the Court had awarded him damages and had held that this amounted to trespass to persons. 

In Collins v. Wilcock, ⁴ a police officer had grabbed a woman’s hand from leaving and the Court had declared this to constitute battery. The court held that any unwanted physical contact, no matter how minimal, could amount to battery. 

Does slapping categorize as assault or battery? 

Slapping or any form of harm or violence will fall under the category of battery and not assault. As discussed above, assault is only a threat to violence while battery involves use of force.  

So, if A and B are in an argument and A screams at B saying “I will slap you, if you do not keep quiet”, then this constitutes assault, even if A does not follow upon this threat and hit B, as it only creates a present fear of violence. However, if A slaps B, then it would be classified as battery as it involves use of force, even if there is no physical injury. 

LIABILITY IN CRIMINAL LAW 

Under criminal law, sections 129, 130, 131 and 136 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 are relevant to this topic. Section 129 defines criminal force as using force on an individual, without their consent, or intending to use force to cause or knowing that it would cause injury, fear or annoyance to the other individual. If A intentionally pulls a woman’s veil, then it is criminal force against her, as she hasn’t consented to it and it causes her harm, injury or could scare her.  

Section 131 states that when assault (defined under section 130) or criminal force is committed without any grave provocation, then a punishment of 3 months imprisonment, or a fine of Rs. 1,000, or both will be awarded. 

Section 136 states that if criminal force or assault is committed on grave provocation, then punishment would still be provided but it would be comparatively less, i.e. simple imprisonment for a term extending up till 1 month, or a fine of Rs. 1,000 or both.  

In Rupan Deol Bajaj v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill ⁵, the petitioner, a senior IAS officer, had alleged that the then Director General of the Police of Punjab had slapped her on the posterior in front of many. The legal issue was addressing whether this amounted to criminal force and assault. The Court had this act was punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (using criminal force or assault against women with an intent to outrage her modesty shall lead to imprisonment of 2 years or fine or both). 

In P. Yuvaprakash v. State Rep ⁶, the Court had discussed the definition of criminal force under section 350 of the Indian Penal Code. The Court had held that even gestures or preparation that causes the other person the present apprehension that criminal force is going to be used against them will be considered as criminal force. 

Thus, slapping an individual or even the mere gesture of raising the hand to show an intention of slapping will constitute as criminal force under section 350 of the IPC, now under section 129 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. However, the intensity of the punishment will change according to the severity of injury, unlike tort law. For example, if the slap only causes minor inconveniences like redness on the cheeks, then the punishment could be payment of a fine. However, if it leads to a more severe injury, then punishment may include both jail and payment of fine. 

Remedy to be sought under which law? 

It must be noted that remedy can be sought under both, civil and criminal law, for the same case at the same time under different courts. Under civil law, the victim will be awarded compensation for the injury suffered, or the breach of the individual’s rights. Under criminal law, the act will be prosecuted under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and will be punished with jail time or fine or both. Both cases can coexist and both proceedings can proceed independently. 

DEFENCE AVAILABLE: 

A common defence available in both, tort and criminal law, is the defence of private defence/ self-defence. In Munshi Ram v. Delhi Administration, ⁷ the Court established that the right to self-defence is a natural human right and that it can be exercised to protect oneself or others from harm. However, the force must never exceed the threat, i.e. it must be proportional. 

In tort law, if the accused proves that the force was used as a means to protect their self from imminent harm, then he can be acquitted provided that the force is proportionate to the threat faced and has to be reasonable. Here, imminent threat refers to when an individual faces a threat that is immediate and unavoidable, leaving no reasonable opportunity to escape it. Using excessive force can undermine the case of self-defence. ⁸ 

Another defence can be using reasonable force to defend another person, i.e. a third part, from imminent harm or danger. This defence is also applicable when force is used to protect their property from imminent threat or danger. Again, the force has to be reasonable and proportionate to the harm.  

In Bradley v. Hunter, ⁹ the Court had held self-defence to be a valid defence to an intentional tort (such as slapping) if the defendant genuinely believed that the force was required to prevent harm. The reasonableness of the force was measured by factors like size, strength and history of the parties involved.  

In criminal law, section 44 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 deals with private defence which is defined as defence against an assault that has the reasonable apprehension of death. Section 44 specifies that this right exists even when the exercise of this could result in harm/ injury/ risk to an innocent person.  

For example, if person A aims to hit B but B moves away, which causes A to hit C, an innocent bystander. The right of private defence of B still exists, even though the exercise of this right caused harm to an innocent third party. In this case, C can sue A for battery in civil/ tort law. However, if the intensity or severity of the slap was extreme, then A can even be held criminally liable.  

SUMMARY: 

Thus, if you ever find yourself or your client in a situation where another person was slapped and legal liability is being questioned, remember this – under civil law (tort law), slapping amounts to battery, i.e. when there is intentional application of force against another without lawful justification. It doesn’t matter if that person was physically hurt or not. The mere use of force, without lawful justification, causes legal liability to pay compensation. Under criminal law, slapping amounts to use of criminal force under section 129 and assault under 130. Provocation cannot absolve liability; it can only reduce criminal liability as stated in section 136.  

Defences available, under civil and criminal law, include private or self-defence where the use of reasonable force to protect oneself, their property or a third party from danger is legally allowed and there can be no liability. Courts have reiterated that the force has to be reasonable and proportional to the threat.   

SOURCES: 

CASE LAWS: 

1. Stephens v. Myers, 1830 – Case link 

2. Venkata Surya Rao v. Nandipati Muthayya, 1963 – Case link 

3. Hurst v. Pictures Theatre Limited (1915) – Case summary 

4. Collins v. Wilcock, 1984 ^– Case summary 

5. Rupan Deol Bajaj v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill, 1995 – Case link 

6. P. Yuvaprakash v. State Rep, 2023 – Case Link 

7. Lane v. Holloway, 1961 – Case Link and Summary 

8. Bradley v. Hunter, 1982 – Case Summary 

9. Munshi Ram v. Delhi Administration, 1968 – Case link 

BOOKS: 

For a comprehensive understanding of trespass to persons in tort law and the defences available under tort law, refer the following books: 

1. Ratanlal Ranchhoddas and Dhirajlal Keshavlal Thakore, The Law of Torts (LexisNexis, Gurgaon, Updated 26th Edition) 

2. Heuston and Buckley, Salmond and Heuston on the Law of Torts (Universal Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 20^th Edition) 

WEBSITES AND BLOGS REFERRED: 

1. Private Defence in IPC 

2. Legal Consequences and Liabilities of Slapping Someone – LegalClarity 

3. Is Slapping Someone A Crime In India?