Criminal Law
Sexual Harassment, Disrobing, Voyeurism and Stalking
Understand Sexual Harassment, Disrobing, Voyeurism and Stalking under BNS through clear legal rules, leading cases, practical examples and exam-ready revision.
Quick answer
Sections 74 to 79 create distinct offences protecting bodily autonomy, privacy and dignity, each with its own conduct, purpose, knowledge and repetition requirements.
Rule and essential ingredients
Sections 74 to 79 create distinct offences protecting bodily autonomy, privacy and dignity, each with its own conduct, purpose, knowledge and repetition requirements. Begin with the statutory language. Criminal liability follows only when the prosecution proves each required ingredient beyond reasonable doubt, subject to any applicable exception or statutory presumption.
Choose the provision
Unwelcome physical advances, sexual demands, pornography and sexual remarks fall within separate harassment clauses with different punishments.
Privacy offences
Disrobing and voyeurism require the particular intent, act, private setting or dissemination described by Sections 76 and 77.
Stalking pattern
Repeated following or contact despite disinterest, and qualifying monitoring of electronic communication, form the core of Section 78.
Application, limits and proof
A strong answer does not stop at a definition. It identifies the contested ingredient, compares the evidence with the statutory threshold and explains why nearby offences or defences do or do not apply.
Consent to capture and sharing
Consent to an image or act does not automatically include consent to dissemination to third persons.
Stalking exceptions
Prevention or detection of crime, legal duty and reasonable justified conduct must satisfy the statutory exceptions, not merely be asserted.
Landmark cases
Learn the facts, the rule and why the case matters. The citation alone will not strengthen an answer.
Apparel Export Promotion Council v. A.K. Chopra
(1999) 1 SCC 759Held: Sexual harassment violates dignity and should not be reduced to a requirement of completed physical assault.
Use in an answer: Use this authority to explain the controlling test for sexual harassment, disrobing, voyeurism and stalking, then apply that test to the problem facts.
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan
(1997) 6 SCC 241Held: Sexual harassment engages equality, dignity and safe-working-environment rights.
Use in an answer: Use this authority to explain the controlling test for sexual harassment, disrobing, voyeurism and stalking, then apply that test to the problem facts.
How to write this answer in an exam
- Open with the relevant BNS provision and its purpose.
- List the ingredients in the order in which they must be proved.
- Apply conduct, circumstances and mens rea separately.
- Address the closest distinction, defence or aggravated form.
- Conclude on liability and punishment without assuming disputed facts.
Quick revision
- Sections 74 to 79 create distinct offences protecting bodily autonomy, privacy and dignity, each with its own conduct, purpose, knowledge and repetition requirements.
- Unwelcome physical advances, sexual demands, pornography and sexual remarks fall within separate harassment clauses with different punishments.
- Disrobing and voyeurism require the particular intent, act, private setting or dissemination described by Sections 76 and 77.
- Consent to an image or act does not automatically include consent to dissemination to third persons.
- The prosecution ordinarily bears the burden of proving every ingredient beyond reasonable doubt.
Test yourself
- What is the central legal test for sexual harassment, disrobing, voyeurism and stalking?
- Which fact establishes the required mental element?
- What nearby rule is most likely to be confused with this topic?
Frequently asked questions
What should an answer on sexual harassment, disrobing, voyeurism and stalking prove first?
Start with the charged BNS provision and the conduct it prohibits. Then prove the required circumstances and mental state separately before discussing punishment or a defence.
Are older IPC judgments still useful after BNS?
Yes, where the BNS language and principle remain materially similar. The current BNS text must lead, and an older case should not override a changed definition, ingredient or punishment.