Shivani Kabra gives us an interpretation of the Section 354 C in light
of foreign jurisdictions of Canada, Australia, United Kingdom and District
of Columbia Code.


The recently amended Indian Penal Code provides for an
independent provision, §354 C, to criminalize the act of
voyeurism. Owing to its recent addition, the provision has not
been interpreted or analyzed in detail. Hence, the primary
focus of this paper is the interpretation of Section 354C in light
of foreign jurisdictions of Canada (Criminal Code (R.S.C.,
1985, c. C-46)), Australia (Crimes Act 1900 – SECT 91J),
United Kingdom (Sexual Offenses Act, 2003 S. 63) and District
of Columbia Code (DC Code: Omnibus Public Safety
Amendment Act, 2006).
The right to privacy has not been specifically defined in the
Indian legal sphere but has only been read in as a
constitutional right for the purpose of Civilian- State
surveillance. However, it lacks a separate recognition of an
independent right not only against State supervision but also
against civilian supervision. Curiously, the offence of
voyeurism seeks to protect private acts of individuals under a
legal structure that refuses to acknowledge privacy rights.
Owing to such logical inconsistencies, it is pertinent to
delineate on this subject and attempt to explain the same in
light of recent developments.
Therefore, the main objective of the author is to characterize
and interpret the current statuesque of the crime in Indian
jurisdiction while verifying the utility of the clause against
foreign case laws.