You can't bash a burglar after all: Government's tough rhetoric branded a farce as it's revealed homeowners are barred from fighting raiders in garden or chasing them outside Justice Minister had promised the use of 'maximum force' against burglars But it has been revealed the new laws are 'riddled with loopholes' The legislation only applies to homeowners if fight takes place inside Defence cannot be used if only trying to protect property Shopkeepers have no defence unless they live above their store Shop assistants cannot get involved unless their loved ones live in the store New laws giving householders the right to fight back against burglars were condemned as a "farce" last night after it emerged they are riddled with loopholes. The Government had promised to let people use maximum force when confronted by intruders, after an outcry at cases where victims were arrested for defending their homes and businesses. Justice Minister Chris Grayling told last year's Tory Party conference: "Householders who act instinctively and honestly in self-defence are crime victims and should be treated that way." Promises: Justice Minister Chris Grayling vowed to beef up protection But today it can be revealed that the new defence of "disproportionate force" - which became law this week - will not apply in many cases. Official guidance sent to judges, prosecutors and police shows: Homeowners cannot rely on the new defence if they find an intruder in their garden or chase them outside - the fight must take place indoors. Shopkeepers can only get away with disproportionate attacks on robbers if they live above their shop, and only if the two parts of the building are connected. Shop assistants and customers cannot get involved in the violence, unless their loved ones happen to be living in the store. Householders cannot use the defence if they are only trying to protect their property, rather than trying to defend themselves or their family. The document admits: "The provision does not give householders free rein to use disproportionate force in every case they are confronted by an intruder." Dramatic CCTV footage released this week showed the risks shop staff are prepared to take to defend their livelihoods. Thurairagh Pirabahuran used his seat to hit gunman Sheldon Green as he tried to rob his store in Ilford, Essex. But the brave shopkeeper does not live above the premises, so would not be protected from prosecution if police decided he had used "grossly disproportionate" force. Last night critics said the detail of the law, due to come into force within days, exposed Mr Grayling's tough rhetoric as worthless. They said it meant terrified homeowners and small businesses would still face possible prosecution if they lash out at criminals. Terror: Thurairagh Pirabahuran, fights an armed robber in his shop in Hainault, Ilford, Essex Malcolm Starr, a spokesman for jailed burglary victim Tony Martin, said: "I think it's an absolute farce. They really must let common sense prevail. He said that rather than drawing up new laws, the system should simply prevent homeowners being arrested as soon as an intruder is attacked. Mr Starr added: "People immediately seem to get arrested and don't get the benefit of the doubt - it's the wrong way round." Nick de Bois, a Conservative MP on the Justice Select Committee, said: "It looks like the Ministry of Justice civil servants are watering down the intent behind this very sensible law. People have the right to defend their property and homes, and they don't need a straitjacket from the Ministry of Justice. Campaigners have been calling for greater protection for burglary victims for years, prompted by a series of cases. Tony Martin, whose farmhouse had been repeatedly broken into, was convicted of murder after he shot two intruders in 1999, killing one. On appeal his sentence was cut. In 2008, Munir Hussain chased and caught one of the three men who broke into his house. He and his brother Tokeer were jailed for attacking the intruder with a cricket bat, although their sentences were also later reduced on appeal. Last September a couple spent two nights in custody after firing a shotgun at intruders, but Andy and Tracey Ferrie were not prosecuted. Mr Grayling has been saying since 2009 that the law on self-defence should be reviewed and the Conservatives" 2010 Election manifesto promised householders "greater legal protection if they have to defend themselves against intruders." Farmer Tony Martin served three years in jail after he shot a burglar dead in his home in 1999 The following year David Cameron himself said: "We'll put beyond doubt that homeowners and small shopkeepers who use reasonable force to defend themselves or their properties will not be prosecuted." Then at last year's Tory conference, Mr Grayling announced that householders would be able to use more than reasonable force. A clause on self-defence was added to the Crime and Courts Bill, which gained Royal Assent on Thursday. But a circular sent this month by the Ministry of Justice makes clear the limitations of the legislation. It states: "Householders are only permitted to rely on the heightened defence if they are using force to defend themselves or others. They cannot seek to rely on the defence if they were acting for another purpose, such as protecting their property. It continues: "The term "in or partly in a building" is used to protect householders who might be confronted by an intruder on the threshold of their home, climbing in through a window perhaps. But householders cannot rely on the heightened defence if the confrontation occurred wholly outside the building, for example in the garden. Steve McCabe, a Labour MP on the Home Affairs Committee, said: "This shows how empty the conference rhetoric is. This constant raising of expectations followed by a failure to deliver, is undermining justice in this country. It's time people like Chris Grayling acted more responsibly. Whitehall sources stressed the legislation was only ever intended to give more protection to homeowners who wake up to find intruders. Mr Grayling said: "Being confronted by a burglar inside your home while loved ones sleep upstairs is a rare but uniquely frightening experience. This law is designed to protect those whose actions in that awful moment may seem disproportionate in the cold light of day.