that other". False imprisonment "is the complete deprivation of his liberty for any time, however short, without lawful cause ... There need not be any actual imprisonment in the ordinary sense." This tort is roughly equivalent to wrongful confinement under 342 of the penal code and additionally encompasses the more specific conduct related to kidnapping under section 359. The ingredients of this tort are as follows: Restraint must be complete. There must be no reasonable condition imposed by occupiers of premises. There must be no reasonable and honest belief which would justify the confinement. Negligence Negligence is a failure to exercise appropriate and/or ethical ruled care expected to be exercised amongst specified circumstances. With regard to negligence, Indian jurisprudence follows the approach stated in Ratanlal & Dhirajlal: The Law of Torts, laying down three elements: A duty of care (i.e. a legal duty to exercise "ordinary care and skill") A violation of the appropriate standard of care Causation (i.e. the violation resulted in injury to the plaintiff's person or property) The Indian approach to professional negligence requires that any skilled task requires a skilled professional. Such a professional would be expected to be exercising his skill with reasonable competence. Professionals may be held liable for negligence on one of two findings: They were not possessed of the requisite skill which he professed to have possessed. They did not exercise, with reasonable competence in the given case, the skill which he did possess. The standard to be applied for determining whether or not either of the two findings can be made is whether a competent person exercising ordinary skill in that profession would possess or exercise in a similar manner the skill in question. Consequently, it is not necessary for every professional to possess the highest level of expertise in that branch which he practices. Professional opinion is generally accepted, but courts may rule otherwise if they feel that the opinion is "not reasonable or responsible". Defamation Defamation law in India largely resembles that of England and Wales. Indian courts have endorsed the defences of absolute and qualified privilege, fair comment, and justification. While statutory law in the United Kingdom provides that, if the defendant is only successful in proving the truth of some of the several charges against him, the defence of justification might still be available if the charges not proved do not materially injure the reputation, there is