If you are stuck in such a situation, here is what to do.

Mr. Ashton, a resident of the bustling city of Northwick, has grown increasingly frustrated with the prevalence of pickpocketing during his daily commute. He contemplated a novel, if aggressive, deterrent. He wondered about the legality of placing a small, spring-loaded clamping device, much like a classic cartoon-style trap, inside an open pocket of his rucksack. His intention was that if a thief were to put their hand inside his bag to steal his wallet, the device would snap shut on their fingers, causing a painful injury and stopping the theft. Mr. Ashton is concerned about whether he would face legal trouble for causing such an injury, even to a criminal.

Advice in such cases

Setting a trap, regardless of the intended target’s criminal intent, is illegal in the United Kingdom. The law does not permit individuals to take pre-emptive, punitive action that is designed to cause injury. While you are entitled to protect your property, the measures you take must be reasonable and proportionate. A device intended to cause bodily harm is considered disproportionate and unlawful. The act of setting the trap is a pre-meditated action, not a spontaneous act of self-defence in response to an immediate threat. Therefore, you would likely be held liable for any injuries caused.

Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is to talk to a lawyer/solicitor. You should not hesitate in paying their consultation fee, which might be in the range of £100 to £400, depending on the case. They are helping you in this situation to come out. They are experts in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored.

Applicable Sections of Law

The primary legislation governing this scenario would be the Offences against the Person Act 1861 and principles from civil law.

• Section 47 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA 1861): This section covers Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm (ABH). An injury like broken or severely bruised fingers from a trap would almost certainly be classified as ABH. By setting the trap, you have intentionally or recklessly applied unlawful force, which is the definition of an assault.
• Section 20 of the OAPA 1861: If the injury were more severe, such as causing deep wounds or permanently disabling the fingers, you could face a charge of Unlawfully and Maliciously Wounding or Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH). The “maliciously” aspect means acting intentionally or recklessly.
• The Law of Torts (Civil Law): The injured individual, despite being in the process of committing a crime, could potentially bring a civil claim against you for damages under the tort of battery. While their own criminal actions would be taken into account (under the doctrine of contributory negligence), it would not erase your liability for intentionally inflicting harm.

If you are the complainant

If you are the person who set the trap, you would be the subject of a criminal investigation. The police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) would view your actions as a pre-meditated assault, not as lawful self-defence. Your intent was to cause injury, which satisfies the mental element (*mens rea*) for the offence. You could face arrest, prosecution, and a potential criminal record, fine, or even imprisonment depending on the severity of the injury caused.

If you are the victim

In this scenario, the “victim” is the would-be thief who was injured. This person is in a dual position. They have committed an offence of attempted theft. Simultaneously, they are the victim of an assault. They have the right to report the injury to the police. The police would be obliged to investigate the assault, even though it was inflicted upon a person engaged in criminal activity. The criminal justice system would deal with each offence separately.

How the police behave in such cases

The police would investigate both alleged crimes. They would likely arrest the injured party for attempted theft and arrest the person who set the trap for assault. They would gather evidence for both incidents, including seizing the trap, taking witness statements, obtaining medical records of the injury, and reviewing any available CCTV footage. The CPS would then review the evidence and decide whether to bring charges against one or both individuals. It is highly probable that charges would be brought against the person who set the trap.

FAQs people normally have

• But they were a criminal trying to steal from me. Why am I in trouble?
  The law does not permit vigilantism. While you have a right to defend yourself and your property, the force used must be in response to an immediate threat and must be reasonable. Setting a trap is a pre-emptive act designed to inflict punishment, which is the role of the state, not the individual.
• What if I put a sign on my bag saying “Danger: Trap Inside”?
  This would not act as a defence. In fact, it could strengthen the prosecution’s case against you as it clearly demonstrates your intention and foreknowledge that the device was dangerous and likely to cause harm.
• What is considered ‘reasonable force’ to prevent pickpocketing?
  Reasonable force would be actions like securing your bag with a zip, holding it in front of you, being aware of your surroundings, or shouting “Stop, thief!” if you catch someone in the act. It does not extend to inflicting physical injury with a pre-planned device.

What evidence is required?

• The trap device itself.
• Medical evidence detailing the injuries sustained by the pickpocket.
• CCTV footage capturing the incident.
• Statements from the person who set the trap.
• Statements from the injured party.
• Any witness testimony.

How long will the investigation take?

A police investigation for such a matter could take several weeks to a few months. The duration depends on factors like the availability of evidence, the severity of the injuries, and the caseloads of the police and the CPS.

Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India