Section 77 punishes watching, or capturing the image of, a woman engaging in a private act in circumstances where she would ordinarily expect not to be observed, or disseminating such an image. The punishment on first conviction is imprisonment of either description for a term of not less than one year but which may extend to three years, and fine; on a second or subsequent conviction, the minimum and maximum both rise to not less than three years but which may extend to seven years, and fine.
Verified against the National Crime Records Bureau's official BNS–IPC concordance (Sankalan Portal), which maps Section 77 to old IPC Section 354C (the concordance itself flags this mapping "(Change)"), and cross-checked directly against the bare text of both Acts.
Sourcing gap, disclosed openly (same recurring gap already flagged at Sections 63 through 66, and 70, 71, 75, and 76): old IPC Section 354C, like the other offences added to this Chapter of the Code in the same amendment package, is a post-1860, amended-era addition. This project's local IPC source text predates that amendment, and a direct search of the full local text — including a search for the word "voyeurism" itself — confirms no such provision exists anywhere in local sources under any number. Section 77 is accordingly marked Substantively changed, on the basis of the concordance's own confirmed historical lineage and its own "(Change)" flag, with this specific sourcing limitation disclosed rather than a false comparison being forced.
| BNS 77 | IPC, 1860 equivalent (concordance) | Found in local text? | Category |
|---|---|---|---|
| 77 | 354C (Voyeurism) | No — absent from local text under any number | Substantively changed |
This source limitation is disclosed here, rather than a word-by-word comparison being forced.
Whoever watches, or captures the image of a woman engaging in a private act in circumstances where she would usually have the expectation of not being observed either by the perpetrator or by any other person at the behest of the perpetrator or disseminates such image shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than one year, but which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine, and be punished on a second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than three years, but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation 1.—For the purposes of this section, “private act” includes an act of watching carried out in a place which, in the circumstances, would reasonably be expected to provide privacy and 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 doing a sexual act that is not of a kind ordinarily done in public.
Explanation 2.—Where the victim consents to the capture of the images or any act, but not to their dissemination to third persons and where such image or act is disseminated, such dissemination shall be considered an offence under this section.
Source: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 45 of 2023), as published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary.
Section 77 punishes three distinct forms of conduct, any one of which is enough: watching a woman engaging in a private act, capturing her image while she does so, or disseminating such an image, in each case in circumstances where she would ordinarily expect not to be observed by the perpetrator or anyone acting at the perpetrator's behest. Explanation 1 defines "private act" to include watching carried out somewhere reasonably expected to provide privacy where the victim's genitals, posterior, or breasts are exposed or covered only in underwear, where she is using a lavatory, or where she is doing a sexual act not ordinarily done in public. Explanation 2 addresses a distinct scenario: even where the victim consented to the image or act being captured, if she did not consent to its dissemination to third persons, disseminating it anyway is itself an offence under this section. The punishment escalates on a second or subsequent conviction, with both the minimum and maximum terms rising, reflecting the law's treatment of repeat offending under this section as significantly more serious.
These judgment(s) relate to Section 77 as a whole rather than to one specific sub-section, and so are presented together here rather than alongside a particular clause above.
A woman who said she was a tenant went with a friend and some workmen to enter a house in Kolkata that was the subject of a dispute between two co-owners, where a civil court had ordered the parties to keep joint possession. The accused, the son of one co-owner, stopped them from entering and clicked photographs and made a video of her on his mobile phone. She lodged an FIR for wrongful restraint, voyeurism and criminal intimidation (Sections 341, 354C and 506 of the IPC). After a chargesheet, the trial court and the High Court refused to discharge him, and he appealed to the Supreme Court.
On the voyeurism charge the Court went back to what the offence requires: watching, or capturing the image of, a woman engaged in a “private act” in circumstances where she would usually expect not to be observed. Nothing in the FIR or the chargesheet said she had been watched or photographed while doing any such private act, so no voyeurism offence was disclosed. Explanation 1 to Section 77 defines “private act” in the same words the Court quoted. The Court also found the wrongful-restraint and criminal-intimidation charges not made out, discharged the accused, and added that where a civil dispute is pending, police and criminal courts should be careful about filing chargesheets and framing charges unless there is strong suspicion based on legally tenable material.
Currency check: decided December 2025, construing Section 354C of the IPC, whose wording on the “private act” definition appears in Section 77 of the Sanhita unchanged; nothing in the materials reviewed indicates it has been overruled.
It can still be an offence in a specific scenario: Explanation 2 makes clear that if the victim consented to the image being captured but not to its dissemination, disseminating it to third persons without her consent is itself an offence under this section.
Yes. The section states a separate, higher punishment tier — a minimum of three years and a maximum of seven — for a second or subsequent conviction, compared to one to three years for a first conviction.
Explanation 1 defines it to include watching carried out somewhere reasonably expected to provide privacy where the victim's genitals, posterior, or breasts are exposed or covered only in underwear, where she is using a lavatory, or where she is doing a sexual act not ordinarily done in public.