CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Project Report

On

“SUIT FOR ASSAULT AND BATTERY”

DRAFTING, PLEADINGS & CONVEYANCING

(D.P.C.)
Submitted To-: Submitted By -:

Dr. B.R.N. Sharma Tarun Kulhar

Dept. of D.P.C. Law Roll No. 1659

Chanakya National Law University B.B.A. LL.B. (Hons.)

Patna. (8th Semester)

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The success of this final report is the outcome of Guidance and valuable suggestions provided by
all the concerned without whom the report could not fide on the right back. I would like to
express my sincere gratitude to Dr. B.R.N. Sharma Sir for giving me an opportunity to do this
project work. I also express my sense of deep gratitude towards the other faculty members for
introducing a program which enables us to learn more. Finally, I will be failing in my duty, if I
do not thank my parents, friends and well-wishers for their enthusiastic support and who have
directly or indirectly helped in some way or the other in making this final report a success.

Tarun Kulhar

1659.

2
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: Type of Research

The research includes different options. They are:

 Exploratory research:

It is usually a small-scale study undertaken to define the exact nature of a problem and to gain a
better understanding of the environment within which the problem has occurred. It is the initial
research, before more conclusive research is under taken.

 Descriptive research:

It is to provide an accurate picture of some aspects of market environment. Descriptive research

is used when the objective is to provide a systematic description that is as factual and accurate as
possible. It provides the number of times something occurs, or frequency, lends itself to satisfied
calculations such as determining average number of occurrences.

Aims and Objectives -

 The researcher aims to find out the elements and defenses involved in assault and battery.

HYPOTHESIS

The hypothesis which researcher has made is that the reasonable apprehension or fear of harmful
contact is necessary to constitute the act of assault and criminal charges aren’t the only penalties
you can face for committing assault or battery. Separate from any criminal prosecution, a victim
of assault or battery also can file a civil suit against their assailant. While criminal prosecution is
meant to penalize defendants for their illegal acts, civil cases are designed to make the victims
"whole" by compensating them for their injuries. Below, you’ll find information on proving civil
assault and battery and the types of damages available to victims.

3
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapters

1. Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------------------05

2. Assault and Battery: Elements-----------------------------------------------------07

3. Analysis of Relevant Provisions---------------------------------------------------10

4. Assault and Battery: Defences-----------------------------------------------------13

5. Case Analysis and Model Formats -----------------------------------------------19

6. Conclusion --------------------------------------------------------------------------21

7. Bibliography-------------------------------------------------------------------------22

4
 INTRODUCTION

ASSAULT

Whether viewed as a civil wrong (a "tort" or personal injury) or a crime, an assault is typically
defined as intentional conduct that is meant to place another person in reasonable apprehension
or fear of harmful contact. The contact must appear to be imminent, meaning that the offender
must appear to have the present ability to cause the contact, even if he or she is not actually
capable of inflicting injury. An assault is committed even if the contact never occurs. It's the
purposeful creation of fear of contact that gives rise to the civil or criminal liability.

It's important to note here that civil assault (which is defined as an "intentional tort") carries the
same definition from state to state, since it's based on longstanding "common law" rules that
apply to civil cases across the country, as opposed to specific laws. Since criminal statutes do
vary from state to state, and every state has its own statutory definition of assault as a crime,
there is bound to be some slight variation from the definition set out above. (In many modern
criminal codes, the definition of "assault" may also encompass "battery," or harmful contact;
more on this later.)

Examples

Acts that could constitute an assault include:

  Angela swings a fist at Valerie, who sees the punch coming, and ducks (Angela doesn’t
actually hit Valerie).

  Andy holds a loaded gun to Victor's head (the same goes even if the gun was unloaded,
or if it's a toy gun, but Victor reasonably thinks it's real).

Examples of acts that would probably not constitute assault include:

  Sitting in a restaurant, Alvin tells Vicky that he intends to run her over in his car at some
point in the future (there's no imminent threat).

5
   Andy intentionally swings a hammer toward Victor's head, but Victor was never aware
of the act.

  Andy swings a hammer at a nail on a wall, and the hammer comes close to Victor's head,
but Andy didn’t know anyone else was around (here, Andy has no intent to cause fear of
harm)

BATTERY

A battery is an intentional act that results in offensive or harmful contact with someone else's
person, without that person's consent. A battery can sometimes be seen as a completed assault,
although that's not a perfect definition.

Making incidental contact with someone -- bumping into them, in other words -- while walking
through a crowd isn't going to amount to battery; but intentionally pushing people in that same
crowd out of the way may be enough. Also, the defendant need not actually touch the plaintiff
using his or her body; the contact may be indirect -- intentionally hitting another person’s car
with your own could be considered battery.

Again, as we touched on in the "assault" section above, this "battery" definition is pretty standard
in civil lawsuits nationwide. But state criminal statutes differ in the language they use to define
"battery," and in many states, the definitions for the crimes of "assault" and "battery" may have a
fair amount of overlap, or one term (i.e. "assault" or "assault and battery") may encompass both
crimes.

Examples

Acts that constitute battery could include:

  playing a joke on a person, where the "punchline" involves offensive contact

  performing surgery on the wrong area of a person's body

  throwing an object that strikes a person, and

6
   poisoning a person's drink.

Examples of acts that do not constitute a battery include:

  tapping a person on the shoulder to ask a question, and

  injuries that occur in the normal course of a sport (since, by agreeing to play the sport,
the participant has consented to contact that is common in the game)

Battery law in the US can be the simple or criminal battery. It can be defined as the force against
another person resulting in some harm or injury due to the harmful or offensive contact including
sexual contact with him. At common law, the simple law includes those crimes which are less
serious than a felony. However it is necessary that for battery there has been an unlawful use of
force must be used, and there should be some injury either bodily or offensive touch should be
present to constitute battery.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ASSAULT AND BATTERY

S.NO. Assault Battery

1 The purpose here is to threaten The purpose is to cause harm
2 There is no physical contact, only such Physical contact is mandatory.
apprehension
3 Pointing a stick towards a person is Hitting with the stick is battery as there is a
assault. physical contact between the two people.

7
 ASSAULT AND BATTERY: ELEMENTS

The elements to establish civil battery are generally the same as for criminal battery. A
successful civil suit for battery will require the plaintiff to prove that the following elements
were present:

1. There should be a physical touch (directly or indirectly).

2. Intention must be present.
3. The physical contact must be without lawful justification.
4. Use of force
5. Battery must be voluntary.

Test Of Battery:
Whether the physical contact so persisted in circumstances gone beyond generally accepted
standard of conduct.

Exception To Battery:
Defences available to Jostler, backslapper, and the hand shaker.

According to the Restatement (Second) of Torts, the assailant doesn’t have to intend to have
physical contact with his victim in order for civil battery to occur. He must merely intend to
cause the imminent apprehension, or fear, of physical harm in his victim. For example, if a
defendant merely intended to scare the plaintiff by swinging a baseball bat near him, but the
plaintiff was accidentally hit by the bat, the plaintiff would have a case for civil battery.

Unlike battery, civil assault doesn’t require that the defendant have any physical contact with the
victim. In a civil suit for assault, the plaintiff will have to prove that the following elements were
present:

Essentials of Assault:
1. Intent
8
2. Apparent ability to carry it out
3. Apprehension
4. Knowledge of threat

As long as the victim is placed in fear of imminent contact, no actual physical contact or injury
need occur. For example, if a defendant intended to scare the plaintiff by swinging a baseball bat
near him, and the plaintiff was put in fear of physical injury, the plaintiff would have a case for
civil assault.1

ANALYSIS OF RELEVANT PROVISIONS

1
Sakshi Raje, Battery- Law of Tort( Sept 14, 2018), https://lawtimesjournal.in/battery-law-of-tort/, Assessed on 18
Feb, 2018 at 10.00 a.m.

9
Civil Assault and Battery

Civil assault and battery are torts. A tort is a wrong committed by one person against another,
2
causing damage. Specifically, civil assault and battery are intentional torts.

Most torts arise from a negligent act, meaning an act that was careless or reckless. “Regular”
torts don’t take the intent of the tortfeasor (the person committing the tort) into consideration. As
long as the tortfeasor had a duty to act in a non-negligent manner, and they breached that duty
and caused harm to someone, they are said to have committed the tort.3

Intentional torts are torts that are committed on purpose. In addition to assault and battery, causes
of action such as false imprisonment, slander, and fraud typically fall under this category. While
the requirements of duty, breach, causation and damages are the same, the added element of the
tortfeasor’s intent is taken into consideration as well. If a plaintiff cannot prove that the tort was
committed intentionally, it may be a case of negligence as opposed to an intentional tort. Imagine
you are standing in a parking lot loading groceries into your car. Another vehicle across the lane
accelerates rapidly in reverse, directly toward you and your vehicle. That same simple set of
facts can be illustrative of negligence, or it may amount to assault and battery.

First, consider that the driver was reaching for a fallen cellphone and slipped and hit the gas,
causing the car to move quickly in reverse. If the driver strikes you or your vehicle, the driver
has committed general negligence. He had a duty to operate his vehicle in a non-negligent
manner, and he breached that duty and caused you harm.

Now imagine that, immediately prior to getting into his car, the driver was yelling and cursing at
you for being in his way while he was trying to back out. Instead of dropping a cellphone and
accidentally hitting the gas, the tortfeasor deliberately threw the car into reverse and drove
toward you, slamming on the brakes at the last instant to avoid hitting you. You were
legitimately apprehensive -- you were afraid he was going to run you over, in other words. The
tortfeasor has intentionally placed you in apprehension of imminent physical harm, and has
committed civil assault. If the driver actually hits you, he has committed civil battery. The
driver’s intent is key.

2
Ibid.
3
David Goguen, Assault and Battery,https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/personal-injury/types-of-personal-injury-
claims/assault-and-battery.html, assessed on 19 Feb, 2019 at 11.00 a.m.

10
Criminal Assault and Battery

A crime occurs when an individual violates a criminal statute that prohibits and punishes certain
conduct. Criminal cases are brought and prosecuted by the state, in the interest of protecting the
public welfare. A jury of one’s peers (or a judge) must agree that the government (usually
represented by a district attorney) has proven -- beyond a reasonable doubt -- that the charged
crime was committed by the defendant. If a guilty verdict is entered against the defendant,
incarceration can follow.

As mentioned above, every state has criminal statutes pertaining to assault and battery. The
criminal prosecution of assault and battery differs from a civil case in two important ways:

 the burden of proof is stricter in a criminal case, and

 there is the added requirement of proving the violation of a specific criminal statute, as
worded by the legislature.

Using the parking lot example above, the driver could be charged with assault and battery if he
intended to strike you with his vehicle and there were laws prohibiting such behavior (which,
again, are on the books in every state).4

A verdict of not-guilty in a criminal assault or battery case does not prevent a victim from filing
a civil suit for the same action. Since civil suits involve monetary damages and aren’t brought by
the state, double jeopardy rules (which prohibit trying a person more than once for the same
actions) are inapplicable. A person can be found not-guilty of a crime, but can still be found
civilly liable and be forced to pay damages arising out of the same incident. The best modern
example of this is the O.J. Simpson trial, where he was found not-guilty of the crime of murder,
but was later found civilly liable for the wrongful death of the victims.

S350. Criminal force.—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

4
Supra note 1

11
the person to whom the force is used, is said to use criminal force to that other. 5 Section 351 and
352 of IPC also governs the conditions and remedies for assault and battery.

Assault and Battery Punishments

Assault and battery punishments vary greatly, depending on the laws of the jurisdiction and the
circumstances surrounding the crime. Generally, assault and battery punishments range from
fines and community service, to imprisonment of one year or more. While first time offenders
may receive more leniency, repeat offenders often face stiffer penalties for similar crimes.

Commonly, felony assault charges result in prison terms of 5 to 25 years. Misdemeanor assault
and battery charges may result in probation, a fine, community service, or imprisonment in the
county jail for up to one year.

Civil Liability

In addition to facing criminal charges, a perpetrator charged with assault and battery might face
civil liability. If the victim is injured, or suffered physical or emotional distress, he could sue the
perpetrator in civil court, where the perpetrator may be ordered to pay money damages in the
form of medical bills, including prescription medications, compensation for the victim’s lost
days at work, and even money for the pain and suffering he caused the victim. Civil liability may
be proven even if the perpetrator escaped criminal prosecution, or was acquitted at trial.
The burden of proof for civil liability is must less stringent, requiring that the victim prove only
that it is more likely than not that the actions of the perpetrator caused his injuries and other
losses.6

ASSAULT AND BATTERY: DEFENSES

In both criminal and civil cases, a person who has otherwise committed an assault and/or battery
might not be liable, if certain defenses apply. For example, if the "plaintiff" or the "victim"
consented to being touched, and the touching did not exceed the scope of that consent, there may

5
Section 350, Indian Penal Code
6
Supra note 3

12
be no liability for battery. A person may also use reasonable force in self-defense -- or to defend
another person -- in a manner that might otherwise constitute assault or battery. Under certain
circumstances, an actor may also use reasonable force to defend his or her property.

Defenses to Trespass to Person:

1. Consent of Plaintiff

If the claimant consented either expressly or impliedly to the torts of assault and battery, there
will be a complete defense.

2. Contributory Negligence

Contributory negligence is generally assumed to be a defense for trespass to person but there is
authority the other way.7

3. Self-Defence

It is lawful for any person to use a reasonable degree of force for the protection of himself or any
other person against any unlawful use of force. The key to successful defense of self-defence is
the element of reasonableness, as the defence will operate if the force used by the defendant is
proportionate to that being applied by an attacker.

Force is not reasonable if it is either Unnecessary- i.e. Greater than is requisite for the purpose.
Ÿ Disproportionate to the evil to be prevented. The relationship of parties may be relevant to the
reasonableness of force used.

4. Prevention of Trespass

It is unlawful for any occupier of land, or for any other person with the authority of the occupier,
to use a reasonable degree of force in order to prevent a trespasser from entering or to control his

7
Bangia R.K, Law Of Torts, 18th Edition 2005, Allahabad Law Agency Allahabad

13
movements or to eject him after entry. This right of using force against a trespasser is available
only to the occupier of the land or his authorized agent.

5. Parental Authority

A parent is not guilty of an assault if he physically interferes with his child by way of reasonable
restraint or chastisement, or for therapeutic reasons-e.g. to take a blood test.

There are special cases which pose particular problems in relation to consent to medical
treatment. The case of children under age 16 years don’t have sufficient maturity and
understanding to take decisions relating to medical treatment or, any other things beneficial for
them. If the child lacks such understanding, the parents may be asked It to provide the consent on
behalf of the child, but the court has jurisdiction in some cases to give or refuse consent on
behalf of the child.

6. Statutory Authority

Apart from the statutory powers of arrest, parliament has authorized medical examinations or
tests which would otherwise constitute a serious battery. E.g. Breath tests under the road traffic
act 1988, section 6, or blood test under sections 20 and 23 of the family law reforms act 1969.

7. Necessity

Necessity could also amount to defence to a claim for false imprisonment. The test for deciding
whether measures falling short of arrest could lawfully be taken against individuals was whether
there was a reasonable suspicion that that individual was presenting a particular threats. The
burden of proof was on the claimant to show that the exercise of discretion to detain was
unreasonable.

8. Inevitable Accident

Inevitable accident provides a good excuse for a prima facie trespass which is otherwise
actionable. An inevitable accident has been defined as an event over which the defendant had no

14
control and the effects of which could not have been avoided by the exercise of the greatest care
and skill. 8

9. Preservation of Public Peace

A person who disturbs public worship or a public meeting or a lawful game may be lawfully
removed. Here the force used shouldn’t be more than what is necessary. Every citizen in whose
presence a breach of peace is being or reasonably appears to be about to be committed has the
right to take reasonable steps to make the person who is breaking or threatening to break the
peace refrain from doing so; and those steps in appropriate cases will include detaining him
against his will.9

CASE ANALYSIS AND MODEL FORMATS

ASSAULT

8
Swati Shankar, Critical analysis on The concept of Trespass to Person
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1073/Concept-of-Trespass-To-Person.html, assessed on 21 Feb, 2019 at
2.00p.m
9
Ibid.

15
Stephen v. Myers10:
In Stephen v Myers (1830), the Claimant was a chairman at a meeting sat at a table where the
Defendant was sat. There were six or seven people between the Claimant and Defendant. The
Defendant was disruptiveand a motion was passed that he should leave the room. The Defendant
said he would rather pull the chairman out of his chair and immediately advanced with his fist
clenched towards the Claimant but was stopped by the man sat next to the chairman. It seemed
that his intention was to hit the Claimant. The Defendant argued that there was no assault as he
had no power to carry out his threat as there were people in between. The court said that not
every threat is an assault. There needs to be a means of carrying that threat into effect: it must a
realistic threat of personal violence. The judge directed the jury (as juries were still in use at the
time) that if the Defendant could have reached the chairman and hit him there was an assault. But
if the Defendant did not have the intention of hitting the Claimant, or it was not realistic that he
could reach the Claimant, then there is no assault. The jury found for the Claimant.

Read v. Coker11:
In Read v Coker (1853) the Claimant was told to leave the premises where he conducted his
business. He refused and the Defendant collected some workmen who stood near the Claimant
with their sleeves rolled up and told him that they would not break his neck if he didn't leave. He
did leave and later brought a successful claim for assault as there was a threat of violence and the
means to carry it out. However, not every conditional threat will be an assault. 

Indian Case:
Bavisetti Venkat Surya Rao v. Nandipati Muthayya12:
In this case, the plaintiff, a well to do agriculturist, was in arrears of land revenue. The village
music, who had duty to collect amount, went to the plaintiff’s residence for the collection of the
amount. On demand being made the plaintiff pleaded his inability to pay the amount that as the
wife had locked the house and gone out for a few days. The defendant insisted to have the
payment the very day, that being the last day of the year for collection of the revenue the plaintiff
was told that on his failure to pay, his movable property will be distained. Since the plaintiff’s
10
1830 4 Cand P:172 E.R. 735
11
138 Eng. Rep. 1437 (1853)
12
AIR 1964 AP 382

16
house was locked and no other movables were readily available, the defendant told him that the
earnings which the plaintiff was wearing would be distained. The village gold smith was called.
On the arrival of the gold smith, one of the persons present there paid off the amount due from
the plaintiff by borrowing the same from another person. The defendants than went away quietly.
The plaintiff sued the village music stating that apart from other wrongs the defendant had
committed assault.

Judgment: It was held that since the defendants, after the arrival of the gold smith said nothing
and did nothing and the threat of use of force by the gold smith 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:

Fagan v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner:13

In Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1969], a criminal case, Fagan was asked by an
officer to park his car. He didn't realize that the car had rolled onto the police officers foot at
which point he was asked to move the car. He responded with verbal abuse and turned off the
engine before complying with the request. The majority of the Court of Appeal held that there
was a continuing positive act starting from when he moved the car to when he turned it off and
as such there was a battery. Whereas Bridge J dissented saying it was an omission as he parked
on the foot accidentally (and thus there was no intent at that stage) and then simply omitted to
move the car, and so there was no battery.

Wilson v. Pringle14:
The Claimant and Defendant were both schoolboys involved in an incident in a school corridor
which resulted in the Claimant falling and being injured. The Defendant argued that there was no
battery as this involves deliberate touching with hostility and the intent to inflict injury and
horseplay did not involve such intent. The Claimant argued that there merely had to be an
intentional touching. The court held that battery involved an intentional touching with hostility,
but no intent to cause injury. The court considered whether a better test would be implied
13
[1969] 1 QB 439
14
[1986] 2 All ER 440

17
consent or a test based on how common the actions are in daily life. These will be useful
considerations but ultimately the touching must be 'hostile'.

Indian Case:

Pratap Daji V. B.B. And C.I. Ryl.15

The plaintiff entered a carriage on the defendant’s railway but by oversight failed to purchase a
ticket for his travel. At an intermediate station he asked for the ticket but the same was refused,
at another place, he was asked to get out of the carriage since he didn’t have a ticket. On his
refusal to get out, force was used to make him get out of the carriage. In an action by him for his
forcible removal, it was held that the use of force was justified as he, being without a ticket was a
trespasser. The defendants were therefore, not liable.

MODEL FORMATS

1. SUIT FOR ASSAULT AND BATTERY

15
(1877) ILR 1 Bom 52

18
1. On November 5, 1995, the defendant assaulted and beat the plaintiff at the plaintiff’s house,
by first spitting on his face and then by striking him with a lathi and thus fracturing the ulna of
his left arm.

2. In consequence, the plaintiff was for a long time unable to transact his business as a pleader
and incurred expenses of surgical and medical treatment.

Particular of Special Damage

(1)Expenses of medical treatment:

Rs.

Fee paid to Dr. Smith for setting the fractured bone ….

Fee paid to Dr. Amba Prasad for assisting Dr. Smith …..

Fee paid to Dr. Smith for……..visits …..

Fee paid to Dr. Amba Prasad for…….visits …..

Paid to Ramlal Compounder for attendance …..

Paid to Banerji and Sons, Chemists, for price of medicines, bandages etc. …..

(2)Loss of legal practice for one and a half month at Rs…..per mensum …..

The plaintiff claims:

(1)Rs…. General damages for humiliation, pain and bodily suffering.

(2)Rs…..as special damages.

(3)Interest from date of suit to that of payment.

2. Compensation for injury person by Assault, Suit for Averments

That as a result of the blow caused by defendant No. 1, who was abetted therein by defendant
Nos. 2 to 5, the plaintiff suffered a comminuted fracture of…… the forehead, which necessitated
an operation and attendance for a period of…. and as a further result thereof there in an opening

19
in the bones of his forehead covered only by skin which pulsates while coughing or breathing
and is susceptible of rupture and consequential injuries: or

That as a result of beating by defendant Nos.2 to 5 at the instigation of defendant No. 1

the plaintiff has suffered fracture of the skull and tearing of right facial nerve causing paralysis of
the right side of the face rendering it almost dead and his vision through right eye has been
considerably impaired; or

That as a result of the assault by defendant Nos. 1 and 3 the plaintiff suffered a sub-
location of axis of the neck rendering him permanently crippled and incapacitated;

That by the said act of throwing acid on the face of the plaintiff by the defendant, his
eyesight has been permanently impaired his face has been scorched, and disfigured necessitating
prolonged medical treatment. The plaintiff has necessarily paid and has become liable to pay
expenses for medical treatment and attendance, for nursing and for medicines, The plaintiff
believes, on information received which is believed to be true, that he will thereafter necessarily
incur further expenditure of a similar nature; or

That by reason of the foregoing incident as a result of the negligence of the defendant,
the plaintiff’s right leg was so crushed and fractured that it had necessarily to be amputated
above the knee, under medical advice, thus rendering him permanently lame and disabled.

4. Averment in case of death by assault

That on …....the defendant attacked plaintiff’s father in the field of the latter while he was
irrigating his said field from……..canal distributaries, at about 4 a.m. and point X in the plan
annexed to the plaint. By reason of the said wanton and unprovoked assault, the plaintiff’s father
suffered severe injuries on the head and right shoulder causing fracture of the skull at its back
wherefrom room the brain oozed out. The test of injuries were revealed in the examination of the
Civil Surgeon of ……….in report dated………and also in the post –mortem examination
conducted by………at…….on…………..a report whereof was also submitted to the police and
the result of such medical examination of the body of plaintiff’s father and his corpse was
revealed at the trial of the defendant for murder under section 302, Indian Penal Code in case No.

20
………of……..tried by the Sessions Judge……….who convicted the defendant on…………
under section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. The said act of
the defendant in causing the death of the plaintiff’s father was malicious and willful and without
any just cause. The plaintiff’s father possessed robust health and was of sober temperament and
industrious. He was aged…………and earning Rs………per annum as a farmer and carried on
the business of a dairy which yielded Rs………..as an yearly income. He has left behind the
plaintiff and his younger brother aged………and ………….who all dependent upon the deceased
for their education, maintenance and support. The plaintiff is the karta of the family and has to
look after his minor brother and sister in his behalf.

CONCLUSION

Whether viewed as a civil wrong (a "tort" or personal injury) or a crime, an assault is typically
defined as intentional conduct that is meant to place another person in reasonable apprehension

21
or fear of harmful contact. The contact must appear to be imminent, meaning that the offender
must appear to have the present ability to cause the contact, even if he or she is not actually
capable of inflicting injury. An assault is committed even if the contact never occurs. It's the
purposeful creation of fear of contact that gives rise to the civil or criminal liability.

A battery is an intentional act that results in offensive or harmful contact with someone else's
person, without that person's consent. A battery can sometimes be seen as a completed assault,
although that's not a perfect definition.

Making incidental contact with someone -- bumping into them, in other words -- while walking
through a crowd isn't going to amount to battery; but intentionally pushing people in that same
crowd out of the way may be enough. Also, the defendant need not actually touch the plaintiff
using his or her body; the contact may be indirect -- intentionally hitting another person’s car
with your own could be considered battery.

In both criminal and civil cases, a person who has otherwise committed an assault and/or battery
might not be liable, if certain defenses apply. For example, if the "plaintiff" or the "victim"
consented to being touched, and the touching did not exceed the scope of that consent, there may
be no liability for battery.

Assault and battery punishments vary greatly, depending on the laws of the jurisdiction and the
circumstances surrounding the crime. Generally, assault and battery punishments range from
fines and community service, to imprisonment of one year or more. While first time offenders
may receive more leniency, repeat offenders often face stiffer penalties for similar crimes.

In addition to facing criminal charges, a perpetrator charged with assault and battery might face
civil liability. If the victim is injured, or suffered physical or emotional distress, he could sue the
perpetrator in civil court, where the perpetrator may be ordered to pay money damages in the
form of medical bills, including prescription medications, compensation for the victim’s lost
days at work, and even money for the pain and suffering he caused the victim.

22
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books and Articles Referred

 Mogha, P.C.,The law of pleadings in India 2017, Eastern Law House, New Delhi

23
  Bangia R.K, Law Of Torts, 18th Edition 2005, Allahabad Law Agency Allahabad
 Hepple and Matthew, Cases and Materials on Tort, 4th edition, Butterworths publishing
house London.
 R.W.M Dias & B.S. Markesinis, Tort Law,, 2nd Edition, Oxford University Press New
York.
 M.Lunney, K Olephant, Tort Law – Texts and Materials, 1st edition 2000, Oxford
University Press New York
 Rattanlal Ranchhoddas, Dhirajlal Keshavlal Thakore, The Law Of Torts, 25th edn 2006,
Wadhwa Nagpur Publications.
 Arthur Underhill, A Summary of the Law of Torts, 9th ed.
 B. S. Sinha, An Introduction to the Law of Torts through Indian Cases.
 Ratanlal R. & D. K. Thakore, English and Indian Law of Torts, 20th ed.

Websites Referred

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

24