Recently, the High Court of Delhi has observed that if a man peeps inside the washroom when a woman is taking bath, it will amount to invasion of her privacy and also attract the offence of voyeurism. The bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that taking bath in a bathroom by any person, whether a male or a female, is essentially a “private act” as it is taking place inside the four walls of the bathroom.

“It cannot be denied that a woman taking bath inside a closed bathroom will reasonably expect that her privacy was not invaded and she was not being seen or watched by anyone as she is behind closed walls behind a curtain. The act of a perpetrator peeping inside the said bathroom will certainly be regarded as invasion of her privacy,” the court said.

In the said matter, the court upholding the conviction of a man under section 354C of Indian Penal Code, as well as the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year imposed on him. He was convicted in 2021 for peeping inside the washroom situated outside a jhuggi. 

Since the age of the victim could not be proved to be less than 18 years, conviction of the appellant under POCSO Act cannot be sustained, the court said.

“Since the date of adoption and not date of birth has been mentioned in school certificate, therefore, Trial Court committed an error by relying on date of birth, which as per admission of parents of victim in this regard, was based on assumptions,” it said.

Noting that the social context of crimes cannot be lost sight of, Justice Sharma said that the courts need to remain alive to the “social realities” in cases where the victim due to her poverty does not have “luxury of having a bathroom inside her house” but has a makeshift bathroom outside her own house.

“The act of the appellant peeping inside the bathroom which unfortunately, only had a curtain on the entrance of the bathroom instead of a door, would certainly attract the criminality under Section 354C of IPC. Needless to say, such an act would certainly put a woman under embarrassment and constant fear of being observed while she takes bath even behind the four walls of a make shift bathroom,” the court said.

Calling it meritless and absurd, the court rejected the argument of the appellant’s counsel that since the washroom used by the victim was situated at a common public place, the act of bathing there cannot be held to be a private act.

Observing that the objective behind introducing the offence of voyeurism was to curb sexual crime against women and to protect their privacy and sexual integrity, the court said:

“The law has to ensure that all citizens are able to enjoy a peaceful life with peace of mind having assurance that their privacy is respected and such kind of trespass and mischief will attract the criminality of voyeuristic behavior of the perpetrator of the crime. The sexual integrity of every person has to be respected and any violation of the same should be dealt with a stern hand.”