The Kerala High Court ruled that the offence of voyeurism under Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is not applicable when a woman is in a place where she cannot expect privacy from being seen or photographed.

More on the news

• This ruling was made in response to a petition from two accused who sought to quash charges related to taking a photograph of a woman in front of her house.
• Case Background
  • Incident Details: The incident occurred in 2022 when the accused allegedly photographed the complainant in front of her house and made gestures with sexual implications when confronted.
  • Initial Charges: The police registered a case under IPC Sections 354C (voyeurism) and 509 (act intended to insult the modesty of a woman).

Key Points from the High Court Ruling

• Voyeurism Not Applicable in Public Places: The court clarified that the offense of voyeurism, under Section 354C of the IPC, is only applicable when a woman is observed or photographed in a private act, where she would reasonably expect privacy.
• Public Place Exception: Since the incident occurred in front of the woman’s house, a public place, the voyeurism charge was quashed.
• Potential Sexual Harassment Charges: The court suggested that the accused’s actions might constitute sexual harassment under Section 354A(1)(i) and (iv) of the IPC, which includes acts intended to insult the modesty of a woman.
• Continuation of Other Charges: The court allowed the prosecution to proceed with charges under Section 509 IPC, which pertains to words, gestures, or acts intended to insult the modesty of a woman.

Check Out UPSC NCERT Textbooks From PW Store

Social Implications of the Kerala High Court’s Decision 

• Redefinition of Privacy Boundaries in Public Spaces
  • Shift in Privacy Expectations: This decision establishes a legal understanding that privacy in public spaces is limited, which may change public perceptions of when and where people can expect privacy.
  • Legal Clarity for Public Interactions: By clarifying the boundaries of voyeurism, the ruling provides guidance on what constitutes an invasion of privacy in public spaces, which could lead to more precise application of voyeurism laws.
• Impact on Women’s Safety and Comfort in Public Spaces
  • Increased Concerns for Personal Safety: Many women may feel less protected in public areas, fearing that unwanted photography could increase without legal consequences, potentially leading to discomfort in spaces like streets, beaches, and parks.
  • Debate on Gender-Specific Protections: The decision may spark discussions on whether additional protections are necessary to safeguard women from harassment and unsolicited attention in public spaces.
• Social Norms Around Public Photography and Respect
  • Influence on Public Behavior: With this legal precedent, individuals may feel more emboldened to take photos in public without seeking consent, which could lead to discomfort or feelings of disrespect among those who are photographed.

DOWNLOAD PDF