Preventing another person from moving freely, blocking them from leaving a particular place, or unlawfully confining them against their will may amount to a criminal offence in Singapore.
These offences can arise in many circumstances, but are sometimes seen in disputes between couples, family members and domestic helpers, as well as confrontations where one person attempts to stop another from leaving.
What begins as an argument can therefore become a police matter if a person is physically prevented or otherwise stopped from going somewhere they have a right to go.
If you are being investigated or have been charged with wrongful restraint or wrongful confinement, GJC Law’s criminal defence team, led by former prosecutor Kevin Liew, can advise you on the allegations, the evidence and the possible consequences of the charge.
What Is Wrongful Restraint in Singapore?
Wrongful restraint is defined under Section 339 of the Penal Code 1871.
In simple terms, wrongful restraint occurs when a person voluntarily obstructs another person and prevents that person from proceeding in a direction in which he or she has a right to proceed.
The victim does not necessarily have to be locked inside a room or building.
Example of Wrongful Restraint
During an argument, A attempts to leave the apartment.
B deliberately stands in front of the only doorway and refuses to allow A to pass.
Depending on the circumstances, B’s conduct may amount to wrongful restraint because A is being deliberately prevented from proceeding in a direction in which A has a right to proceed.
Other situations might include:
- physically blocking someone’s path;
- standing in a doorway to prevent someone leaving;
- using physical force to stop someone walking away; or
- creating an obstruction specifically to prevent another person from proceeding.
Whether an offence has actually been committed will depend on the circumstances and evidence.
What Is the Punishment for Wrongful Restraint?
Under Section 341 of the Penal Code, a person convicted of wrongful restraint may be punished with:
- imprisonment for up to one month;
- a fine of up to $1,500; or
- both imprisonment and a fine.
What Is Wrongful Confinement?
Wrongful confinement under Section 340 of the Penal Code is more serious.
It occurs where a person wrongfully restrains another person in such a way that the victim is prevented from proceeding beyond certain limits.
The easiest way to understand the difference is:
Wrongful restraint prevents a person from going in a particular direction.
Wrongful confinement prevents the person from leaving a particular area.
For example, locking someone inside a bedroom, apartment or other enclosed area and refusing to allow that person to leave may amount to wrongful confinement.
Physical locks are not necessarily the only way a person may be confined. Threats or other conduct that effectively prevents a person from leaving may also be relevant.
Examples of Wrongful Confinement
Example 1 – Locking Someone Inside a Room
There is an argument between two people. One person goes into a bedroom and the other person locks the door from outside to prevent them from leaving.
This may constitute wrongful confinement.
Example 2 – Preventing a Partner From Leaving the Home
During a heated domestic dispute, one partner wants to leave the apartment.
The other partner prevents all means of exit and makes it clear that the person will not be permitted to leave.
Depending on the circumstances, this could amount to wrongful confinement.
Example 3 – Confining a Domestic Helper
An employer deliberately locks a domestic helper inside the home so that she cannot leave.
Such conduct may amount to wrongful confinement and can be treated particularly seriously where the circumstances involve abuse or exploitation of a vulnerable victim.
What Is the Punishment for Wrongful Confinement?
Under Section 342 of the Penal Code, wrongful confinement is punishable with:
- imprisonment for up to 3 years;
- a fine; or
- both.
The substantially higher maximum imprisonment term reflects the more serious nature of preventing someone from leaving a defined area altogether.
Wrongful Restraint vs Wrongful Confinement
Although the offences are related, there is an important distinction.
Wrongful restraint generally involves preventing someone from proceeding in a particular direction.
Wrongful confinement goes further by restricting the person’s movement within defined boundaries so that they cannot leave.
For example, blocking someone from walking through a particular doorway could potentially amount to wrongful restraint.
Locking that person inside the room so that there is no way for them to leave could potentially amount to wrongful confinement.
The precise charge will depend upon what happened and the evidence available to the police and prosecution.
Wrongful Confinement Involving Domestic Helpers
Allegations involving domestic helpers can be particularly serious because of the relationship between an employer and a domestic worker.
A useful Singapore case is Chua Siew Peng v Public Prosecutor [2017] SGHC 128.
The case involved a domestic helper who was locked inside her employer’s condominium unit. The helper eventually attempted to escape through a window and suffered serious injuries.
The High Court observed that where wrongful confinement of a domestic helper is intended to facilitate, allow or conceal physical abuse, a custodial sentence should be the starting point.
The case demonstrates that the Court may consider not only the fact that a person was confined, but also why the confinement occurred, the vulnerability of the victim and the surrounding conduct.
Wrongful Restraint Between Couples and Family Members
Allegations of restraint or confinement can also arise during domestic disputes.
For example, during an argument one person may:
- prevent the other person from leaving the home;
- block a doorway;
- take steps to stop the person leaving a room;
- physically hold the person back; or
- use threats to prevent the person from leaving.
These cases can be complicated because the parties may give very different accounts of what occurred.
Evidence such as CCTV footage, mobile phone recordings, WhatsApp or text messages, photographs, witness accounts and the layout of the premises may become important when determining whether someone was genuinely prevented from leaving.
Where family members are involved, wrongful confinement or restraint may also have implications beyond the criminal investigation, including possible family violence proceedings.
Does There Have to Be Physical Force?
Not necessarily.
Wrongful confinement does not simply mean physically locking a door.
For example, the Penal Code itself illustrates wrongful confinement by referring to a situation where armed persons are positioned at the exits of a building and the victim is told that they will shoot if the victim attempts to leave.
The victim may technically be capable of walking towards the exit, but the threat effectively prevents the person from leaving.
The Court will therefore consider what actually prevented the alleged victim from moving freely.
What If I Had a Reason for Stopping the Person?
The existence of a disagreement or personal reason does not automatically give someone the legal right to restrict another person’s movement.
However, every case turns on its facts.
There may be disputes about:
- whether the alleged victim was actually prevented from leaving;
- whether the accused deliberately obstructed the person;
- whether there was another available means of leaving;
- how long the alleged restraint or confinement lasted;
- whether threats were actually made;
- whether physical force was used; and
- whether the evidence supports the account given by the complainant.
These issues can be important when determining whether the elements of the alleged offence can be established.
More Serious Forms of Wrongful Confinement
The Penal Code also contains specific offences dealing with more serious circumstances.
These include:
Wrongful Confinement in Secret – Section 346
This concerns wrongful confinement carried out in circumstances indicating an intention that the confinement, or the location of the confined person, should not become known to persons interested in that individual or to a public servant.
Additional imprisonment of up to 2 years may be imposed.
Wrongful Confinement to Extort Property or Compel an Illegal Act – Section 347
Where a person is wrongfully confined for purposes such as extorting property or compelling an illegal act, the offender may face imprisonment of up to 3 years and a fine.
Wrongful Confinement to Extort a Confession – Section 348
This provision covers circumstances where confinement is used to obtain a confession or information, or to compel the restoration of property or satisfaction of a claim or demand.
The punishment may extend to 3 years’ imprisonment and a fine.
What Should I Do If I Am Being Investigated?
Being accused of preventing someone from leaving does not by itself establish that wrongful restraint or wrongful confinement occurred.
The circumstances surrounding the incident matter.
If you are asked to provide a statement to the police, it is important that your account accurately explains what happened, including the sequence of events and any evidence that may support your version.
Where relevant, preserve messages, photographs, CCTV footage, recordings or other material relating to the incident rather than deleting or altering it.
Frequently Asked Questions
It can be. If you deliberately obstruct someone so that they cannot proceed in a direction in which they have a right to proceed, the conduct may constitute wrongful restraint under Section 339 of the Penal Code.
Potentially, yes. If a person is deliberately prevented from leaving a room or other defined area against their will, this may constitute wrongful confinement under Section 340.
Yes. Physical contact is not necessarily required. An obstruction or threat may, depending on the circumstances, prevent a person from moving or leaving even without physical contact.
Wrongful restraint prevents someone from proceeding in a direction in which they have a right to go. Wrongful confinement restricts the person within defined limits so that they cannot leave that area.
Under Section 342 of the Penal Code, wrongful confinement may be punished with imprisonment for up to 3 years, a fine, or both.
If you are being investigated for wrongful restraint or wrongful confinement, obtaining legal advice at an early stage can help you understand the allegation and the relevant legal issues. A criminal lawyer can also advise you about evidence that may be important to your defence.
Speak to our Criminal Lawyers
Allegations of wrongful restraint or wrongful confinement can arise suddenly from an argument or domestic dispute, but the consequences can be significant, particularly where there are allegations of violence, threats or abuse of a domestic helper.
GJC Law’s criminal defence team is led by Kevin Liew, a former Public Prosecutor who now heads the firm’s Criminal Law Department.
If you have been accused of wrongful restraint or wrongful confinement, our criminal lawyers can review the circumstances of the allegation, advise you on the applicable Penal Code provisions and assist you through the investigation or court process.
