BACK TO SECTIONS
BNS 2024ACTIVE FRAMEWORK

Section 73

Stalking

Replaces colonial-era: IPC 354D

First offence: Bailable; Repeat: Non-BailableCognizable: First offence: Non-Cognizable; Repeat: CognizableMagistrate First Class

Reform Highlights

1

Renumbered from IPC 354D to BNS 73.

2

Digital monitoring explicitly retained — covers social media tracking, GPS monitoring, email surveillance.

3

Escalating penalties for repeat offenders preserved.

4

Exception for lawful law enforcement surveillance maintained.

THE STATUTE

The Clause

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, email or any other form of electronic communication, commits the offence of stalking.

Legal Commentary

Section 73 criminalises stalking — a provision first introduced into Indian law in 2013, post-Nirbhaya, recognising the severe psychological harm caused by obsessive, repeated pursuit of a person who has clearly indicated they do not welcome contact. The section has two limbs: physical stalking (repeatedly following and attempting to contact a woman despite clear disinterest) and digital stalking (monitoring her internet, email, or electronic communication). The digital limb is particularly significant in the smartphone era — tracking someone's location via apps, monitoring their social media, accessing their emails without consent, or creating fake profiles to follow them all fall within this provision. The section is gender-specific, applying only to a man stalking a woman. The gradation of punishment for repeat offenders — escalating from bailable to non-bailable, from non-cognizable to cognizable — reflects legislative recognition that stalking is a progressive behaviour that often escalates to physical violence. Stalking is frequently the precursor to acid attacks, sexual assault, and domestic violence. An exception exists for lawful law enforcement activities.

Landmark Precedents

Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997)

(1997) 6 SCC 241
RELEVANCE

The foundational case that led to codification of sexual harassment as a criminal offence — BNS 73/74 (outraging modesty) is the physical counterpart to the Vishaka framework.

Case Simulations

"A man who repeatedly shows up outside a woman's workplace after she has clearly told him to stop — physical stalking under BNS 73(i)."
"A man who installs spyware on his ex-girlfriend's phone to monitor her location and messages — digital stalking under BNS 73(ii)."
"A rejected admirer who creates 20 fake social media accounts to follow and monitor a woman's online activity — digital stalking."
"A police officer conducting court-authorised surveillance of a suspect — protected under the lawful investigation exception."

Expert Insights

Passively viewing public posts is unlikely to constitute stalking. The provision requires actively monitoring her digital behaviour. Creating fake accounts to follow her, tracking her location via apps, or monitoring her messages would qualify.
Courts look at context — blocking someone, explicitly telling them to stop, reporting to authorities, or any consistent pattern of rejection. The accused cannot claim they did not understand the signals of disinterest if they were reasonably clear.