Section 75 defines sexual harassment through four categories of conduct — unwelcome physical contact and explicit sexual overtures, a demand or request for sexual favours, showing pornography against a woman's will, or making sexually coloured remarks — and prescribes two separate punishment tiers: rigorous imprisonment up to three years, or fine, or both, for the first three categories; and imprisonment of either description up to one year, or fine, or both, for the fourth.
Verified against the National Crime Records Bureau's official BNS–IPC concordance (Sankalan Portal), which maps Section 75 to old IPC Section 354A, and cross-checked directly against the bare text of both Acts.
Old IPC Section 354A was inserted into the IPC by later amendment, after its original 1860 text, and its amended wording is not reproduced on this page; no word-by-word comparison with the immediately prior IPC text is therefore stated here, and readers who need that comparison should consult the amended IPC directly. A separate, older and narrower provision, IPC Section 509 (“Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman”), is mapped by the concordance to BNS Section 79, not to this section. The category shown below is Substantively changed.
| BNS 75 | IPC, 1860 equivalent (concordance) | Note | Category |
|---|---|---|---|
| 75 | 354A (Sexual harassment and punishment for sexual harassment) | Amended-era provision | Substantively changed |
(1) A man committing any of the following acts:—
(i) physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures; or
(ii) a demand or request for sexual favours; or
(iii) showing pornography against the will of a woman; or
(iv) making sexually coloured remarks,
shall be guilty of the offence of sexual harassment.
(2) Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (i) or clause (ii) or clause (iii) of sub-section (1) shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
(3) Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (iv) of sub-section (1) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Source: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 45 of 2023), as published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary.
Sub-section (1) defines sexual harassment through four distinct categories of conduct by a man, any one of which is enough to constitute the offence. Clause (i) covers unwelcome, explicit physical contact and sexual advances. Clause (ii) covers a demand or request for sexual favours, whether or not accompanied by any physical contact. Clause (iii) covers showing pornography to a woman against her will. Clause (iv) covers making sexually coloured remarks. Each category is distinct and independently sufficient; the section does not require more than one category of conduct to be established, nor does it require the conduct to occur more than once, unlike the separate offence of stalking under Section 78.
Sub-section (2) fixes the punishment for the three more serious categories of conduct — unwelcome physical contact and explicit sexual overtures, a demand for sexual favours, and showing pornography against a woman's will — at rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or fine, or both. This is an entirely optional structure: a court may impose imprisonment alone, fine alone, or both together, up to the stated maximum, with no minimum term specified.
Sub-section (3) fixes a separate, lighter punishment specifically for the fourth category — making sexually coloured remarks — at imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or fine, or both. This category is the one that does not involve physical contact, a demand for favours, or the showing of pornography.
These judgment(s) relate to Section 75 as a whole rather than to one specific sub-section, and so are presented together here rather than alongside a particular clause above.
A social worker in a Rajasthan village was allegedly gang-raped, and social activists and NGOs brought a class-action petition to the Supreme Court. Their aim was to secure protection for working women against sexual harassment at the workplace, a field in which, as the Court recorded, the existing civil and penal laws did not adequately provide specific protection. The Court held that each such incident violates a woman's fundamental rights to gender equality and to life and liberty (and, as a consequence, her right to practise her profession). Because no legislation yet dealt with the subject, it used its power under Article 32 of the Constitution to lay down binding guidelines and norms, to operate “until a legislation is enacted for the purpose.”
The guidelines defined sexual harassment as unwelcome sexually determined behaviour, direct or by implication, and listed physical contact and advances, a demand or request for sexual favours, sexually coloured remarks and showing pornography among its forms. The four categories in Section 75(1) echo that list. The guidelines themselves, however, were directions to employers and institutions (preventive steps, complaint committees, disciplinary action), not a criminal offence carrying punishment, which is what Section 75 now creates.
Foundational and historical context only. The guidelines were a stop-gap, laid down to apply until Parliament legislated. Parliament has since enacted the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, which supersedes them in operative effect for workplace complaints; the criminal offence is now the one in Section 75 itself (previously Section 354A of the IPC). This case is therefore cited here for the origin of the definition, not as current operative guidance.
Currency check: decided August 1997; superseded in operative effect by the 2013 Act, as explained above, and cited only as the historical source of the definition. It pre-dates 2015; no later authority was found that is as foundational on this exact point.
Yes. Sub-section (1) does not require repeated conduct; a single act falling within any of the four listed categories is enough to constitute the offence.
No. Both sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) allow a court to impose imprisonment alone, fine alone, or both together, up to the stated maximum — imprisonment is not mandatory.
The bare text separates the four categories into two punishment tiers, with clause (iv) (sexually coloured remarks) carrying a lower one-year maximum compared to the three-year maximum for the other three categories, which involve physical contact, a demand for favours, or showing pornography.