Whoever repeats or continues a public nuisance, having been enjoined by any public servant who has lawful authority to issue such injunction not to repeat or continue such nuisance, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.
IPC Simplified Explanation
IPC Section 291 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) addresses the continuance of a public nuisance after an injunction to discontinue it has been issued. This section penalises individuals who persist in committing a public nuisance despite being legally ordered to stop. The objective is to enforce compliance with legal injunctions and ensure that public nuisances are effectively decreased.
Key Elements:
- Public Nuisance: The act must cause inconvenience or harm to the public.
- Injunction to Discontinue: A legal injunction must order the individual to stop the nuisance.
- Continuance: The individual continues the nuisance despite the injunction.
Is IPC Section 291 Bailable?
Yes, IPC Section 291 is a bailable offence. This means that an accused person has the right to be released on bail by providing a security amount and a bail bond. A police officer or a magistrate can decide to grant bail.
IPC Section 291 Punishment
The punishment for an offence under IPC Section 291 includes:
- Imprisonment: The convicted person can be sentenced to imprisonment for a term that may extend up to six months.
- Fine: The person can also be liable to pay a fine, which may extend up to one thousand rupees.
- Both: In some cases, the court may impose imprisonment and a fine.
This provision aims to enforce the cessation of nuisances and ensure compliance with legal orders intended to protect public welfare.
Example of IPC Section 291
A factory was causing significant air pollution in a residential area, leading to numerous health complaints from the residents. The local authorities issued an injunction to the factory owner, ordering them to cease operations until appropriate pollution control measures were implemented. Despite the injunction, the factory owner continued to operate the factory, causing ongoing pollution and health issues.
The owner’s continuance of the public nuisance despite the legal order led to charges under IPC Section 291. In court, it was established that the owner’s actions were will fully disregarding the injunction, endangering public health. Consequently, the factory owner was imprisoned for three months and fined one thousand rupees, highlighting the importance of adhering to legal orders to abate public nuisances and protect community welfare.
