Section 146

This provision descends from Section 374 of the old Indian Penal Code, 1860, drafted in an era when practices like 'begar' (forced unpaid labour), bonded labour, and coercive work arrangements were common in colonial and feudal India. It was meant to give ordinary people a criminal remedy against being made to work without consent. The provision works alongside Article 23 of the Constitution, which separately declares forced labour and human trafficking unconstitutional, showing that India's legal system treats forced labour as both a constitutional wrong and a criminal offence.

There is limited reported case law interpreting Section 374 IPC (now Section 146 BNS) specifically, but courts have shaped the broader idea of 'forced labour' while interpreting Article 23 of the Constitution. In People's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1982), the Supreme Court held that 'forced labour' is not limited to physical force — making someone work for less than minimum wage, or under economic distress with no real choice, can also amount to compulsion. This reasoning has informed how 'unlawfully compels' and 'against the will' are understood in related bonded-labour and forced-labour contexts, though courts applying Section 374/146 in ordinary criminal cases still look at direct facts of coercion (threats, confinement, or force).

• Myth: This law only applies to extreme cases like slavery or kidnapping.
  Fact: Courts interpreting related forced-labour principles have said even subtle coercion — like threats, debt traps, or paying far below minimum wage under pressure — can count as compelling labour against someone's will.
• Myth: If the worker was paid something, it can't be 'forced labour'.
  Fact: Payment does not automatically make labour voluntary; if the work was done against the person's genuine will due to force or coercion, this section can still apply.