ORDER Abdur Rahim, J. 1. There can be no doubt that the facts found, namely that the accused took away the boat licenses from the boatmen with the result that the authorities did not permit the boat to proceed further up the channel, do not constitute an offence of wrongful restraint or confinement. Here the act of the accused did not cause the restraint though it led to the boat being detained by other persons. What Section 339, Indian Penal Code, contemplates is that there must be obstruction attributable directly to the person charged, and the legislature apparently did not intend to include within the scope of the section an act which in its remote and indirect consequence might obstruct the free movement of a person. 2. The conviction and sentence must be set aside and, the fine if paid be refunded.