Introduction
In a world with intricate aspects of privacy and it’s gradually increasing fragility, voyeurism appears as a shadow crime- silent, disturbing, invasive and intensely violating. In the modern landscape of a sophisticated society, voyeurism emerges as a profound question to deal with, which extends beyond the traditional limits of privacy violation, ethical conduct and laws. It is no longer about the physical capacity of the perpetrator or is not confined to peeping through the windows, this intrusive practice has mutated into a more complex phenomena which is driven by the misuse of technology and scientific advancements and failure of laws to compete with the modern realities.
Voyeurism is not limited to national boundaries, gender, age, caste or color, it appears as a global challenge and however, the way it is acknowledged and addressed by different countries varies depending upon their power dynamics, comprehensive understanding of the crime and legal mechanisms, leaving the victims of this crime helpless and vulnerable and the perpetrators encouraged due to the lack of strict legal consequences.
The Global Perspective on Voyeurism as a New Age Crime:
As mentioned above, voyeurism as a crime cannot be confined within borders as it extends to multiple jurisdictions with a broad range of dramatic challenges. For instance, the U.S. addresses voyeurism both at federal as well as at state level. The Legislative Act[i] in U.S. under the18 U.S. Code 1801[ii], criminalizes the act of capturing images and videos of individuals in a private space which is supposed be a safe setting and not visible to other individuals, without their express consent, provided when there is a rational anticipation of privacy. This law is applicable primarily to the federal properties such as national parks, military bases, etc.
This Act lays down that the perpetrators can face prison up to one year along with monetary fines. The state laws in the U.S. vary from state to state particularly focusing on secret pornography, non- consensual recorded images or videos as voyeurism. A major example here is, the State of Washington which penalizes intentional photography or filming of another individual’s intimate/ private areas without their consent, as voyeurism.[iii]
The problem that the U.S. faces is the non- standardization of laws against voyeurism, leading to inconsistencies and loopholes in the laws, giving the perpetrators an upper hand.
Another big international entity, the European Union seems to tackle this entire issue of voyeurism in a more harmonized manner as compared to others. The EU attempts to handle this issue through a direct approach of privacy rights and protection of personal data through GDPR[iv] which play a critical role by establishing a set of guidelines on to how personal and private data of individuals should be collected, stored and shared.
Under the GDPR, the individuals have the right to control and manage their personal information including their own images which have been captured without their consent. Moreover, the EU member states have their private laws as well which address and deal with the issue of voyeurism such as the “Voyeurism Offences Act of 2019”[v] of UK which criminalizes the entire Act including “up- skirting” which involves the photographing while and individual’s clothing for sexual gratification[vi].
The legal framework of EU presents a more effective approach rather than a defensive one which exemplifies that the modern problems of the digitalized world are to be tackled with a more actionable and a proactive approach.
Canada on the other hand, has a progressive framework which explicitly penalizes the act of voyeurism as a non-consensual recording of individuals or observation with naked eyes who are engaged in intimate acts where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy under “Section 162.1 of The Criminal Code of Canada”[vii]. Canada also addressed the increasing use technology and its hazards in terms of voyeurism through the active interpretation by the Judiciary in these laws in order to adapt to the new age challenges. For instance, the Courts have highlighted in their judgments, the significance of consent and “reasonable expectation of privacy”[viii].
The Indian Legal Landscape – A Defensive Approach for Voyeurism
The Indian Legal Framework represents a complex portrayal of voyeurism as an offence against human dignity and personal liberty where there is a rational and a reasonable apprehension of privacy. The act of voyeurism in India was primarily governed under “Section 354 C of the Indian Penal Code”[ix], now under “Section 77 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita”[x]. However, the moral and ethical considerations of this act are far beyond the legal limits of these definitions. There have been multiple cases which reflect the growth of Judicial Activism towards voyeurism as an offence, recognizing its seriousness but at the same time they represent anacute gap that exists between the legal understanding and comprehension of this offence in the era of growing technological advancements exposing the systemicweaknesses.
The recent Karnataka electrician case[xi] where the accused filmed a woman in her own house without her consent, the High Court set a precedent by recognizing the gravity of this crime as a threat to human dignity and personal liberty. However, it should be noted that the procedural delay is one factor that was clearly evident, which might defeat the objective behind penalizing the perpetrator, i.e., administration of justice.
Another very recent case of Pune Housing Society Scandal[xii] reflects the invasion of privacy through voyeurism in our day to day and daily spaces, where a case has been filed against a society member for filming the other members of the same housing society without consent. This case clearly reveals a disturbing pattern of the increasing number of such cases where the systemic inefficiencies prevent proper and timely justice.
Another alarming case where two individuals have been arrested for secretly filming inside the girls washroom of an engineering college of Hyderabad, followed by police investigation and charges against seven individuals in total including the principal, the chairman and the director. This troubling case highlights the grave invasion of privacy in an educational set up which calls for immediate awareness supplemented by legal and systemic sanctions.[xiii]
The Ethical Dilemma of Public Awareness and Privacy
The legislative framework and the Judicial Activism particularly in the context of voyeurism seem to be defensive rather than being proactive and preventing the crime in the first place. Another issue with the Indian laws in this context is that, they define Voyeurism as a gender based offence only focusing upon women and not taking the privacy of men or LTBTQIA+ community into account, which again reflects the restricted and inadequate approach of Indian laws towards Voyeurism.
Voyeurism is not just a legal issue or an issue concerning the privacy of individuals; it is an issue pertaining to the ethics where the fundamental question remains: How do we strike a balance between social awareness and individual’s privacy rights? This ethical dilemma is an intricate landscape of rights, personal liberty, privacy, societal stigma, public awareness and navigating through voyeurism in an affective and proactive manner. When it comes to digital invasion of privacy through voyeurism,“technology acts as a double- edged sward”,as with the advancements in hidden cameras, smartphones and other tools, voyeurism has evolved as more sophisticated crime. It is now, not just limited to secretly filming or recording others without their consent, but has expanded to revenge pornography, cyber- stalking techniques, unauthorized streaming, etc.
Considering this, the best practices from Europe concerning the GDPR aligns well with the approach of informed consent, data minimization and ethical oversight in maintaining transparency and accountability. The entire debate about striking a balance between privacy and awareness needs proper consideration in order to navigate the complexities concerning voyeurism and non- consensual use of personal data for the same, primarily prioritizing the rights of individuals while taking the essential steps for fostering a more safe and secure environment free from non-consented filming in a private space where there is a reasonable apprehension of individual privacy.
Conclusion
The path towards tackling the problem of Voyeurism is more extensive than merely creating legal restrictions or upholding technological safeguards. It is a broader portrayal of many societal challenges as a whole- creating an environment of consent, cultivating a culture of mutual respect and ethical use of technological advancements. There is demanding need for collective understanding towards maintaining a dynamic but a protected society. This issue transcends the world borders, legal landscapes and cultural or ethical contexts, undermining the individual liberty and privacy that leaves its victims helpless and defenseless amongst all the systemic inefficiencies and social stigma.
The comparative analysis from different countries or international entities such as the U.S., the EU and Canada with India reveals that there is a critical need for increasing the efficiency of legal responses towards voyeurism ranging from proactive to defensive or reactive measures to keep pace with the developing technological advancements.
The pressing need for comprehensive legal reforms with actionable solutions escalates especially when the society grapples with the technologically evolving nature of voyeurism. The best practices from EU and Canada serves as the prototype for an effective legal framework, meticulously dealing with various issues related to voyeurism. Moreover, addressing this issue requires a collaborative effort from the Lawmakers, the Judiciary and mainly from society at large.
Hence, as we navigate into this intricate landscape of voyeurism, legal protection, individual privacy and public awareness, it is important to foster a protected and a sheltered environment where the people of the society feel safe in their personal spaces; an environment free from constant fear of unauthorized surveillance or exploitation; only then it is possible to eradicate voyeurism as an illegal practice, upholding the fundamental principle of human dignity and individual privacy.
[i]H. Rept. 108-504 – VIDEO VOYEURISM PREVENTION ACT OF 2003.https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/108th-congress/house-report/504/1
[ii]18 U.S. Code § 1801 | Video Voyeurism, https://www.egattorneys.com/video-voyeurism
[iii]RCW 9A.44.115: Voyeurism. https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.44.115 (last visited Jan 24, 2025).
[iv]General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Legal Text, General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), https://gdpr-info.eu/
[v]Voyeurism (Offences) Act 2019, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/2
[vi]Rojin Tasman, What Is Voyeurism?, Britton & Time Solicitors, https://brittontime.com/2022/04/08/what-is-voyeurism/
[vii]Legislative Services Branch, Consolidated Federal Laws of Canada, Criminal Code, (2024), https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-162.HTML
[viii]R. v. Jarvis – SCC Cases,https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/17515/index.do
[ix]IPC Section 354C – Voyeurism, A Lawyers Reference, https://devgan.in/ipc/section/354C/
[x]BNS Section 77 – Voyeurism.https://devgan.in/bns/section/77/
[xi]The Hindu Bureau, Karnataka High Court Declines to Quash Voyeurism Case against Electrician, The Hindu, Jun. 20, 2024,https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/karnataka-high-court-declines-to-quash-voyeurism-case-against-electrician/article68312596.ece
[xii]TNN / Jan 17, 2025 & 00:53 Ist, Cheating, Forgery and Voyeurism Case Filed against Housing Society Member | Pune News, The Times of India,https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/cheating-forgery-and-voyeurism-case-filed-against-housing-society-member/articleshow/117310985.cms
[xiii]2 arrested for voyeurism at Hyderabad college, case against 7 including principal, India Today (2025),https://www.indiatoday.in/india/telangana/story/voyeurism-hyderabad-college-case-against-officials-including-principal-director-chairman-2660088-2025-01-05
Author Name- Adv. Jasmine Suri, B.A.LL.B (H), LL.M., Symbiosis Law School, Pune
