Section 354, 354 A, B, C, and D of the IPC: What You Need to Know

Section 354, 354 A, B, C, and D of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman. This section was enacted to protect the dignity and modesty of women, and to deter the accused from committing such acts.

The section has been amended several times over the years, most recently in 2013. The amendments 2013 have made the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman more serious and have increased the penalties for those who are convicted of the offence.

In addition to Section 354, there are several other sections of the IPC that deal with offences against women. These include Section 354A, which deals with sexual harassment; Section 354B, which deals with stalking; Section 354C, which deals with voyeurism; and Section 354D, which deals with acid attacks.

What are Sections 354, 354 A, B, C, and D of the IPC?

Section 354:

states that whoever assaults or makes the use of criminal force to any woman, or who by any means whatsoever intends to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage the modesty of any woman, commits the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman.

The punishment for the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and with fine.

Section 354A: Sexual harassment

Section 354A of the IPC defines sexual harassment as follows:

Whoever makes any unwelcome sexual gesture or advances towards any woman, or touches any part of her body with sexual intent, without her consent, or utters any words, makes any sound or shows any object with sexual intent or exposes his person to her, with intent to insult or annoy her; or any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature, shall be guilty of the offence of sexual harassment.

This section was introduced in the IPC in 1997 to address the growing problem of sexual harassment in India. It covers a wide range of behaviors, from making lewd comments to touching someone without their consent. The key element of the offence is that the conduct must be unwelcome. 

Section 354B: Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe

Section 354B of the IPC defines assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe as follows:

Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to disrobe her or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby disrobe her, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both.

This section is similar to Section 354, but the focus is on the intent to disrobe the woman. This offense is more serious than Section 354 because it involves a greater degree of violence and humiliation.

Section 354C: Voyeurism

Section 354C of the IPC defines voyeurism as follows:

Whoever watches or captures the image of a person engaging in a private act without that person’s consent, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage that person’s modesty, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

This section was introduced in the IPC in 2013 to address the growing problem of voyeurism in India. It covers a wide range of behaviors, from taking pictures of people without their consent to watching them through windows or other openings. The key element of the offense is that the act must be private. If the person is aware that they are being watched, it will not be considered voyeurism.

Section 354D: Stalking

Section 354D of the IPC defines stalking as follows:

Whoever follows the woman and contacts, or attempts to contact such woman to foster personal interaction repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest by such woman; or monitors the use by the woman of the internet, email or any other form of electronic communication, commits the offence of stalking.

This section was introduced in the IPC in 2013 It covers a wide range of behaviors, from following someone around to sending them unwanted messages. The key element of the offense is that the conduct must be persistent and unwanted.

know more: Section 420 of the IPC

Sec.323 of the IPC , Sec. 34 of the IPC

What are the latest Supreme Court and High Court judgments on Section 354 of the IPC?

In recent years, the Supreme Court and High Courts have issued several judgments that have clarified the scope of Section 354 of the IPC. These judgments have made it clear that the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman can be said to be committed in the following ways, including by:

• Touching a woman’s body without her consent;
• Making sexually suggestive remarks to a woman;
• Following a woman and making her feel uncomfortable;
• Flashing a woman;
• Taking or publishing a woman’s photograph or video without her consent.

Supreme Court’s latest judgments: 

• Raju Pandurang v. State of Maharashtra (2021): The Supreme Court held that the term “modesty” in Section 354 of the IPC is not limited to physical chastity, but also includes a woman’s sense of self-respect and dignity.
• State of Punjab v. Major Singh (2022): The Supreme Court held that the offense of sexual harassment under Section 354A of the IPC can be committed even if there is no physical contact between the accused and the victim.
• State of Uttar Pradesh v. Pappu (2023): The Supreme Court held that the offense of voyeurism under Section 354C of the IPC can be committed even if the accused does not intend to outrage the modesty of the victim.

High Court’s latest judgments: 

• Kerala High Court in the case of ‘State vs. Akhil’ (2023): The Kerala High Court held that a mere threat or abuse by a man towards a woman would not attract the offense of stalking under Section 354D of the IPC.
• Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of ‘Manju vs. State of Madhya Pradesh’ (2023): The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the offense of sexual harassment under Section 354A of the IPC can be committed even if the victim is not physically present at the time of the offense.
• Delhi High Court in the case of ‘T Manikandan vs. The State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)’ (2023): The Delhi High Court held that there is no illegality in convicting an accused under Section 354 and Section 354A of the IPC simultaneously.
• State of Maharashtra v. Ganesh Pandurang Gawade (2023): The High Court held that the offense of sexual harassment under Section 354A of the IPC can be committed even if there is no physical contact between the accused and the victim. The Court also held that the victim’s consent to the accused’s presence in her workplace is not a consent to his sexual advances.
• State of Maharashtra v. Dinesh Ramchandra Patil (2023): The High Court held that the offense of voyeurism under Section 354C of the IPC can be committed even if the accused does not intend to outrage the modesty of the victim. The Court also held that the offense of voyeurism is complete once the accused watches or captures the image of a person engaging in a private act without that person’s consent.
• State of Maharashtra v. Akash Ashok Dhore (2023): The High Court held that the offense of stalking under Section 354D of the IPC can be committed even if the accused and the victim are known to each other. The Court also held that the offense of stalking is complete once the accused follows the victim and attempts to contact her despite a clear indication of disinterest by her.

The judgments have also made it clear that the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman can be committed even if there is no physical contact between the accused and the victim. For example, in the case of Supreme Court of India v. B.S. Joshi (2013), the Supreme Court held that the offence of outraging the modesty of a woman can be committed by making sexually suggestive remarks to her over the phone.

What are the implications of these judgments for women’s rights?

The judgments of the Supreme Court and High Courts have had a significant impact on women’s rights in India. These judgments have made it clear that the law protects women from a wide range of offences, and that women can seek justice if they are victims of these offences.

Summing up :

Section 354, 354 A, B, C, and D of the IPC is an important law that protects the dignity and modesty of women. The latest Supreme Court and High Court judgments have clarified the scope of this law, and have made it clear that women can seek justice if they are victims of offences against their modesty.