Kerala High Court, in Ajith Pillai v State of Kerala [2024:KER:78155], says taking a woman’s photos while she was standing in front of her house without any secrecy will not attract the offence of voyeurism and the offence is attracted only upon watching or capturing images of a woman engaging in a ‘private act’ as mentioned under Section 354C of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The explanation to Section 354 C of the IPC defines ‘private act’ as an act of watching a private act carried out in a place where a person usually expects privacy. This includes situations where the victim’s genitals, posterior or breasts are exposed or covered only in underwear; or the victim is using a lavatory; or the victim is engaged in a sexual act that is not ordinarily done in public.
The High Court quashed the proceedings against the accused under Section 345C on finding that the alleged occurrence of capturing images took place when the de facto complainant was standing in front of her house without any secrecy.
The court says, if a woman normally appears in a public place or private place not in circumstances where she would usually expect, any other person if either see or captures her image, the same, in no way, affect her privacy by exposing the genitals, posterior or breasts are exposed or covered only in underwear etc., no offence under Section 354C of the IPC, would attract.
The accused was alleged of committing offences punishable under Sections 354C (Voyeurism) and 509 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult woman’s modesty) of the IPC.
But the high court quashed the charge under 354 C but allowed the trial court to decide whether the charge under Section 509 of the IPC would be attracted or not.
References
- Ajith Pillai v State of Kerala [2024: KER:78155]
