Kerala High Court’s decision: Taking photos of women’s private parts outside their homes is not a crime
New Delhi. The Kerala High Court recently said in an important judgment that if a woman is in a public or open place where she cannot expect complete privacy, and in such a situation her photograph is taken or she is seen by any person, then This will not be counted as the crime of voyeurism. Justice A. Badruddin clarified that viewing or taking the image of a woman is punishable only if she is engaged in a “private act” and that place requires privacy.
The Court emphasized that the crime of voyeurism applies only when a person watches or photographs a woman in an activity where privacy can be expected, such as exposing private parts, using the bathroom, to commit, or engage in, any private sexual activity. In such cases, violating the privacy of a woman will be considered a crime under section 354C of IPC. This decision was given while hearing a petition filed by a petitioner named Ajit Pillai. Pillai had sought quashing of the charges of Section 354C (voyeurism) and Section 509 (word, gesture or act insulting the dignity of a woman) imposed on him. The complainant had alleged that two persons took photographs of her outside her house and made obscene gestures to insult her dignity.
The Court clarified that a “private act” falling under Section 354C is one in which the woman has a reasonable expectation of privacy. For example, if a person’s private parts are exposed, he or she is using the bathroom, or engaging in a private sexual act, this would count as “private act.” In this case, the incident took place in front of the complainant’s house, which the Court did not consider within the definition of “private act”. Therefore, the allegation of voyeurism does not arise in this case.
The court quashed the voyeurism charge, but allowed the prosecution to continue under Section 509. Under this section, the crime of words, signs or acts insulting the dignity of a woman comes. Additionally, the Court said that the alleged acts of the petitioner in this case may also fall under Section 354A (sexual harassment) of the IPC, and this would be further considered by the trial court. This decision points out under what circumstances the safety and privacy of women is violated in public places, and under what circumstances it will not be considered a crime. This decision has given rise to an important discussion in the society on the safety of women and the limits of their privacy.
