Wrongful restraint: The expression “Wrongful restraint” implies keeping a man out of a place where he wishes and has a right to be. Section 339 defines it thus: “Whoever voluntarily obstructs any person so as to prevent that person from proceeding in any direction in which that person has a right to proceed is said wrongfully to restrain that person.
Wrongful confinement: Section 340 lays down that whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits, said “wrongfully to confine” that person.
As regards difference between the two, wrongful confinements, in the first place, is a form of wrongful restraint. It is keeping a man-within limits out of which he wishes to go and has a right to go while wrongful restraint is keeping a man out of a place where he wishes to go, and has a right to be.
In the second place, in wrongful confinement a person is restrained from moving beyond a certain area within which he is confined, but in wrongful restraint he is free to move anywhere other than to proceed in a particular direction.