Does threatening prosecution always amount to coercion under Section 15 ICA?

No. Threatening a prosecution is not by itself forbidden by the IPC. It becomes coercion only if the threat is to file a false charge and is meant to force consent.

What must a party prove to establish coercion here?

(1) The threat was made; (2) it was a threat to do an act forbidden by the IPC (e.g., false charge); and (3) it was intended to make the party sign the agreement.

Why did the coercion claim fail in this case?

Because a mere threat to prosecute—without showing it was a false charge and was used to force agreement—does not amount to coercion.

What is the quick rule takeaway?

A lawful warning of prosecution is not coercion. Only a threat to do something forbidden (like lodging a false case) can qualify.

askari-mirza-v-bibi-jai-kishori-coercion-criminal-charge

Askari Mirza v. Bibi Jai Kishori (Coercion & Threat of Prosecution)

Contract Law High Court (India) 1912 Citation: 16 IC 344 Bench: High Court Reading time: ~4–5 min

Author: Gulzar Hashmi | India | Published on 26 Oct 2025

```

Quick Summary

A lender found her borrower had lied to get a loan. She warned she would file criminal charges if he did not repay. They then made a fresh repayment agreement. Later, the borrower cried “coercion.” The court said: a mere threat to prosecute is not coercion. Only a false-charge threat, used to force consent, counts under Section 15.

Issues

Does a threat to file criminal charges amount to coercion under Section 15 of the ICA?
What must be proved to set aside an agreement on this ground?

Rules

Threatening prosecution is not by itself an act “forbidden by IPC”.
It becomes coercion if the threat is to file a false charge (forbidden by IPC).
To succeed, the plaintiff must prove: (1) threat was uttered; (2) it was to do something forbidden by IPC; (3) it was intended to force the agreement.

Exam Tip: Ask “false or true?” If the threat is to lodge a false case, Section 15 may bite.

Facts (Timeline)

Timeline of events in Askari Mirza v. Bibi Jai Kishori

Loan: Defendant (lender) gave a loan to the plaintiff (borrower).

Discovery: Lender learned the loan was obtained by misrepresentation.

Warning: Lender warned she would file criminal charges if money was not repaid.

New agreement: Parties executed a fresh arrangement for immediate recovery.

Dispute: Borrower alleged the new agreement was taken by coercion.

Arguments

Plaintiff (Borrower)

Agreement obtained by coercion—threat of criminal case forced consent.
Therefore, the new agreement should be set aside.

Defendant (Lender)

Warning of a lawful prosecution is not IPC-forbidden.
No proof of a false-charge threat or intent to force consent.

Judgment (Held)

Judgment concept — coercion and threat of prosecution

The court held that only filing a false charge or threatening a false charge is an IPC offense. A lawful warning to prosecute wrongdoing is not forbidden. Hence, the plea of coercion failed.

Threat of a lawful prosecution ≠ coercion under Section 15.
No ground to avoid the repayment agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

Coercion under Section 15 requires an act forbidden by IPC. A simple threat to prosecute is not forbidden; only a false charge (or threat thereof) qualifies, and it must be used to compel consent.

Why It Matters

Draws a clean line between lawful pressure and illegal coercion.
Prevents misuse of “coercion” to defeat fair recovery when a crime may be involved.
Practical guide for drafting and enforcing settlement/repayment agreements.

Key Takeaways

Threat to prosecute ≠ coercion unless it is a false-charge threat.
Must prove threat + IPC-forbidden act + intent to force agreement.
Lawful warnings can coexist with valid consent.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “TIF Test = Threat • IPC-forbidden • Force”

Threat was made,
IPC-forbidden act (false charge),
used to Force consent.

3-Step Exam Hook

Identify if charge threatened was false/forbidden.
Check intent to compel agreement.
Apply Section 15 → coercion only if all three limbs proved.

IRAC Outline

Issue

Does a warning to prosecute for fraud make a repayment agreement voidable for coercion?

Rule

Section 15 ICA: act must be forbidden by IPC. Threat of a false charge can be coercion; a lawful threat cannot.

Application

Here, only a lawful warning was shown; no proof of false-charge threat or intent to force consent.

Conclusion

No coercion; the agreement stands.

Glossary

Coercion (ICA §15): Committing or threatening to commit any act forbidden by IPC, or unlawful detaining of property, to make a person contract.
False Charge: Knowingly lodging a baseless criminal accusation—an IPC offense.
Consent: Free agreement of the will; vitiated if obtained by coercion, fraud, or undue influence.