Section 78 defines stalking as a man following a woman and repeatedly attempting to foster personal interaction despite her clear indication of disinterest, or monitoring her use of the internet, e-mail, or other electronic communication, subject to three defined exceptions where the conduct is justified. The punishment is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and fine, on first conviction; and up to five years, and fine, on a second or subsequent conviction.
Verified against the National Crime Records Bureau's official BNS–IPC concordance (Sankalan Portal), which maps Section 78 to old IPC Section 354D, 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, 70, 71, and 75 through 77): old IPC Section 354D, 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 "stalking" itself — confirms no such provision exists anywhere in local sources under any number. Section 78 is accordingly marked Substantively changed, on the basis of the concordance's own confirmed historical lineage, with this specific sourcing limitation disclosed rather than a false comparison being forced.
| BNS 78 | IPC, 1860 equivalent (concordance) | Found in local text? | Category |
|---|---|---|---|
| 78 | 354D (Stalking) | 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.
(1) Any man who—
(i) follows a woman and contacts, or attempts to contact such woman to foster personal interaction repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest by such woman; or
(ii) monitors the use by a woman of the internet, e-mail or any other form of electronic communication,
commits the offence of stalking:
Provided that such conduct shall not amount to stalking if the man who pursued it proves that—
(i) it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime and the man accused of stalking had been entrusted with the responsibility of prevention and detection of crime by the State; or
(ii) it was pursued under any law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any law; or
(iii) in the particular circumstances such conduct was reasonable and justified.
(2) Whoever commits the offence of stalking shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term 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 may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Source: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 45 of 2023), as published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary.
Sub-section (1) defines stalking through two forms of conduct by a man. Clause (i) covers following a woman and repeatedly contacting or attempting to contact her to foster personal interaction, despite a clear indication that she is uninterested — repetition and a clear, already-communicated lack of interest are both required. Clause (ii) covers monitoring a woman's use of the internet, e-mail, or any other form of electronic communication, which does not itself require repetition or a prior indication of disinterest, reflecting the different, more covert nature of this form of conduct. The proviso then carves out three defined exceptions where the conduct will not amount to stalking, provided the man proves the relevant ground: conduct pursued to prevent or detect crime by someone entrusted with that responsibility by the State, conduct pursued under any law or to comply with a legal condition or requirement, or conduct that was, in the particular circumstances, reasonable and justified. The burden of proving any of these three grounds rests on the man, not on the woman to disprove them.
Sub-section (2) fixes the punishment for the offence defined in sub-section (1): imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and fine, on a first conviction; and imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and fine, on a second or subsequent conviction. Both figures are stated as maximums, with no minimum term specified, so a court retains discretion over the actual sentence imposed up to the applicable ceiling, but the ceiling itself rises meaningfully for repeat offending under this section.
No. Unlike clause (i), which requires repeated conduct despite a clear indication of disinterest, clause (ii) covering monitoring of internet, e-mail, or other electronic communication use does not itself state a repetition requirement.
The proviso places the burden on the man accused of stalking to prove that his conduct falls within one of the three stated exceptions; it is not for the woman to disprove them.
The law treats a second or subsequent conviction more seriously: sub-section (2) raises the maximum term from three years to five years, and changes the offence from bailable to non-bailable, on a second or subsequent conviction.