Gujarat High Court
Sejalben W/O Pareshkumar vs State Of Gujarat on 6 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 223 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Sd/-
========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
========================================================
SEJALBEN W/O PARESHKUMAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
========================================================
Appearance:
SWAPNESHWAR GOUTAM(9051) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS.C.M.SHAH, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 06/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant - original complainant under Section 413 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'the BNSS ') against respondent no.1 - State and the respondent no.1 - original accused challenging the impugned judgment and the order passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Trial Court') in Special Page 1 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined (POCSO) Case No. 26 of 2020 order dated 01.07.2024, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent no. 2 - original accused from the offence under Section 354(C) of the Indina Penal Code ((hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC') and under Section 11(iv) of the POCSO Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').
1.1 The appellant and the respondent no. 2 are hereinafter referred to as 'the complainant and the accused' as they stood in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:
2.1. The residential house of the complainant Sejalben Pareshkumar Shah and the residential house of the accused were opposite each other in Vrindavan bungalows, Vaghodiya-
Dabhoi Ring Road, Kubereshwar Marg, Vadodara and on 05.03.2017 while at around 8:15am, the minor daughter of the complainant was standing outside of her house waiting for the school van, the accused was staring at her in a wrongful manner. Page 2 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined When asked what was he looking at, the accused started laughing and the minor daughter of the complainant got frightened. The complainant Sejalben Pareshkumar Shah, the mother of the minor victim, filed a complaint at the Panigate Police Station on the same day under Section 354(C) of the IPC, which came to be registered as Panigate Police Station I- C.R.No.76 of 2017.
2.2. After registration of the FIR, the investigation was carried out by the concerned Investigating Officer and after having sufficient material against the accused, the chargesheet came to be filed before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate. 2.3. The accused was duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned 12th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara and a charge was framed at Exh.5 under Section 354(C) of the IPC and the plea of the accused was recorded at Exh.6. The accused denied the contents of the charge and during the dependency of the trial, the learned APP filed an application at Exh.24 stating that the provisions of the POCSO Act are attracted as the victim is a minor and an Page 3 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined application at Exh.24 was preferred to add Section 11(4) of the POCSO Act. After the parties were heard, the learned Trial Court allowed the application and as the offence under the POCSO Act is triable by the Special Court, a committal order under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C. was passed and the case was committed to the Special Court, Vadodara.
2.4. In connection with the charge framed by the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate, the statement of the accused was again recorded at Exh.19 by the learned Trial Court, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record. 2.5. After the closing pursis was submitted by the learned APP at Exh.29, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code was recorded wherein the accused denied the evidence on record and stated that he has been falsely framed as he has filed a complaint against the complainant and he is innocent. The accused did not step into the witness box or lead any evidence. After hearing the arguments of the learned APP and learned advocate for the Page 4 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined accused and after perusing the documents on record, the learned Trial Court, by the impugned judgment and order dated 01.07.2024, was pleased to acquit the accused for the alleged offence.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant - original complainant has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the complainant has proved the case beyond reasonable doubts but the learned Trial Court has not appreciated that the accused was stalking the minor daughter with bad intention and the evidence of the victim has not been appreciated by the learned Trial Court in the proper manner and in the true spirit. There are no material contradictions in the testimonies of the witnesses which can affect the case of the prosecution but without appreciating that the victim who has attained enough maturity of thought or understanding so as to judge the nature of the act that it was indecent behaviour has not been properly appreciated by the learned Trial Court. The learned Trial Court has not appreciated that the victim is able to understand the act of voyeurism and the learned Trial Court ought to have considered the sensitiveness Page 5 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined of the incident and the act of voyeurism on the part of the accused that has been proved beyond reasonable doubts. The learned Trial Court has not considered the contents of the FIR and has failed to consider the presumption, which is in nature and is required to be drawn against accused in cases filed under the POCSO Act and by not drawing presumptions and not appreciating the evidence on record, and hence, the judgment and order of acquittal is completely erroneous. The victim has identified the accused and such admission does not require material evidence. The victim has narrated the entire episode, trauma and agony suffered by the act of the accused and such act should be strictly viewed which is the aim and object of the legislature in Section-11 of the POCSO Act and Section 354(C) of IPC. The learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate that the accused has not produced any evidence to show that any false allegations were leveled against him by the complainant and the learned Trial Court has not considered the statement of the victim with regard to the act of laughing of the accused with a bad intention which could be understood by the minor victim. Moreover, the learned Trial Court has not considered that on Page 6 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined 08.11.2016 the appellant and the father of the victim went to meet the Police Commissioner, Vadodara, where it was categorically mentioned that the respondent no.2 was stalking the minor with bad intention whenever the complainant and her daughter used to step out of the house and the accused used to come out of his house in boxer shorts and would be singing and dancing and this aspect has been completely missed out by the learned Trial Court. The learned Trial Court has wrongly discarded the reliable and trustworthy evidence of the appellant and victim and the impugned judgment suffers from the vices of patent illegality, absolutely wrong reasoning and perverse approach to the facts of the case, misconception of law and applicability of the provisions of the Statutes, and hence, the appeal be admitted and the impugned judgment and order be quashed and set aside.
4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Swapneshwar Gautam for the appellant and learned APP Ms.C.M.Shah for the respondent no.1 - State.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Swapneshwar Gautam for the Page 7 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined appellant has taken this Court through the entire evidence of the prosecution on record and has filed the entire evidence in the form of a paper book. Learned advocate submits that the learned Trial Court has not considered that the prosecution witnesses which include the complainant, her husband, the minor victim and three neighbours have all stated that the accused was stalking and staring at the minor girl in a wrong manner and the act of the accused is proved beyond reasonable doubts. The learned Trial Court has not considered these aspects and in the evidence, it is proved that the incident had occurred on 05.03.2017 at 8:15 a.m., and thereafter, the complainant had immediately gone to the Police Station and had given a written complaint to the police, and thereafter, the FIR was lodged. The learned Trial Court has not considered that the father of the victim has also supported the case of the prosecution and has categorically stated that he was standing in the door way of his house and he had witnessed the incident. The victim has also identified the accused and has stated that the accused was standing in his house and he was looking at her in a bad manner but the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the Page 8 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined evidence of the victim and her parents and the other witnesses in a proper manner. Learned advocate further submits that the evidence proves that the respondent no.2 was stalking the minor victim and was engaged in an act of watching the victim and the entire act of the respondent no.2 who is the perpetrator of the crime falls within the definition of Section 354(C) of the IPC and the offence of voyeurism is clearly made out. Learned advocate further submits that it is settled law that minor discrepancies and inconsistencies in the deposition of the victim is not relevant when there are other evidences available on record of the case but the same have not been considered by the learned Trial Court. Learned advocate further submits that the evidence of the victim can be said to be of a sterling witness as the evidence is of a very high quality and calibre and can be accepted at its face value without any hesitation but the learned Trial Court has merely relied on minor omissions and contradictions and has passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal, and hence, the appeal must be admitted.
6. Learned APP Ms.C.M.Shah for the respondent no.1 - State has submitted that the entire evidence on record does not Page 9 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined prove the offence of voyeurism under Section 354(C) of the IPC as the definition of voyeurism itself states that the accused must be watching a woman engaged in a private act. As per the case of the complainant, the victim was ready to go to school and she was stepping outside of her house to sit in the school van and her mother had accompanied her and the accused who is residing exactly opposite the house of the complainant was standing in his house. There is no iota of evidence that at the time when the accused was watching the victim she was engaged in any private act. As per the explanation-1 of Section 354(C) of the IPC and there was no act that was being done by the victim which is not ordinarily done in public. The learned Trial Court has considered the entire evidence and has discussed the entire evidence in great detail in the judgment and has also considered that there are cross cases filed between the parties and the present case has been filed as a counter blast to the cases filed against the complainant and her husband by the accused. The learned Trial Court has also discussed the legal aspects and has rightly passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal and there is no scope for any interference Page 10 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined in the impugned judgment and order. Learned APP further submits that the State has not received any request for filing an appeal and as per the communication dated 22.07.2029 no appeal is proposed to be filed by the State, and hence, the appeal is not required to be admitted.
7. It is a settled principle of law that in an appeal against acquittal, the Appellate Court is circumscribed by limitation that no interference has to be made in the order of acquittal unless after appreciation of the evidence produced before the Trial Court, it appears that there is some manifest illegality or perversity which could not have been possibly arrived at by the Court. It is also a settled principle that there is no embargo on the Appellate Court to review the evidence but, generally the order of acquittal shall not be interfered with as the presumption of innocence of the accused is further strengthened by the order of acquittal. The golden thread which runs through the web of administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case of the prosecution i.e. (i) guilt of the accused and (ii) his innocence, the view, which is in favour of the accused, Page 11 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined should be adopted, and if the trial Court has taken the view in favour of the accused, the Appellate Court should not disturb the findings of the acquittal. The Appellate Court can interfere with the judgment and order of acquittal only when there are compelling and substantial reasons and the order is clearly unreasonable and where the Appellate Court comes to conclusion that based on the evidence, the conviction is a must.
8. As per the settled principles of law, the evidence of the prosecution on record is re-appreciated and PW-1 Sejalben Pareshkumar Shah examined at Exh.9 is the complainant and mother of the victim and has stated that the incident has occurred on 05.03.2017 at around 8:15am near her house. Her minor daughter was going to sit in her school van and while she left her house the accused, who was residing in the house opposite her house, was watching the minor daughter in a bad manner. The minor daughter asked him what was he looking at and the complainant also asked the accused why he was looking in such manner but the accused started laughing and immediately the complainant dialed 181 and went to the Police Station and filed the complaint, which is produced at Exh.10. In Page 12 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined the cross - examination, the witness has stated that there is a compound in front of her house and the school van was waiting outside the compound. The place between both the houses is constantly teeming with persons passing by and the house of the accused is exactly opposite the house of the complainant. If the complainant steps out of her house, she would be able to see the house of the accused, and in the complaint, she did not state that the accused was looking at her daughter in a bad manner. In the complaint, she has also not mentioned that she had dialed 181 and they have facilities for parking and security in their society. She had given the complaint on 05.03.2017 and had filed a written application to the police on the same day. The accused had filed a complaint against them on 29.11.2016, which was pending for trial.
8.1. PW-2 Pareshkumar Kanhaiyalal Shah examined at Exh.12 is the husband of the complainant and father of the minor victim and he has stated that on 05.03.2017 at around 8:15am his daughter was going to school and the accused was watching his daughter and at that time he was standing in his door way. He had dialed 181 and they came and took the accused to the Page 13 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined police station. His wife had filed the FIR, and at that time, his wife had also given a copy of the application dated 29.10.2016 to the police station regarding the quarrel about bursting crackers and on 08.11.2016, they had gone to meet the Police Commissioner and a copy of the application dated 08.11.2016 was also given to the police. In the cross-examination, the witness has admitted that his wife would accompany his daughter till the school van and in his statement before the police he did not mention that he was standing in his door way. He had accompanied his wife to the Police Station while filing the complaint and the police had recorded his statement at the same time.
8.2. PW-3 the minor victim has been examined at Exh.13 and has stated that on the day of the incident she was going to school to appear for her examinations and the school van had reversed in front of the house of the accused and was parked in front of her house. When she and her mother came out, the accused was standing inside his house and was looking at her in a bad manner and when she was about to sit in the school van he smiled and she asked him why was he laughing. She sat in the Page 14 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined van and she does not know what had happened thereafter. In the cross-examination, the witness has admitted that the house of the accused is situated exactly opposite their house and if they step out of the house they could see the house of the accused. The accused had filed a case against her father and her father too had filed a case against the accused and the accused was angry as her father had filed a case against him. She does not remember the name of the driver of the school van and the van would come right up to the gate of their house. Her mother would accompany her till the school van and make her sit in the school van. Her father was present with her when the police had recorded her statement and the police had also discussed about the incident with her father. The witness has admitted that there is a difference between a person laughing and looking in a bad manner.
8.3. PW-4 Parulben Bhadreshbhai Rai examined at Exh.14 is an eye-witness as per the case of the prosecution but the witness has clearly stated that she was not present at the time of the incident and she cannot say how the accused was looking at the minor daughter. The witness has not supported the case of Page 15 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined the prosecution and has been declared hostile. In the cross- examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that she was in her house at the time of the incident.
8.4. PW-5 Prabhudas Shankarbhai Patel examined at Exh.15 is the neighbour of the parties and he has stated that the accused used to mock the victim and would look at her and laugh and the father of the victim had dialed 181 and called the police. In the cross-examination, the witness has admitted that his house is situated four houses away from the house of the victim, and at the time of the incident, he was going to pick flowers.
8.5. PW-6 Manojbhai Parshottambhai Patel examined at Exh.16 is also a neighbour of the parties who has stated that the accused would often look at the minor victim and laugh at her and the reason was the cases filed between them. The father of the victim had dialed 181 and the police had come but at the time of the incident he had gone to the temple. He was going from the temple and he does not know anything about the Page 16 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined incident and the police has not recorded his statement. In the cross-examination, the witness has admitted that merely if a person was looking at the other person, it cannot be said that any molestation has taken place.
8.6. PW-8 Hasmukhbhai Nanjibhai Patel examined at Exh.21 is the Sub-Register, who has produced the birth certificate of the victim at Exh.22 and the date of birth of the victim is 21-06-2001.
8.7. PW-9 Baliyabhai Nayakabhai Rathwa examined at Exh.25 is the PSO who has registered the complaint and has produced a copy of the extract of the Station Diary at Exh.26. 8.8. PW-7 Sandeepbhai Vishnubhai Vasava examined at Exh.17 is the Investigating Officer, who has narrated the procedure undertaken by him during investigation. In the cross- examination, the witness has admitted that there were CCTV cameras fixed at the place of incident but the complainant did not give any copy of the CCTV footage. When the complainant had come to file the complaint at the Police Station, she had stated that the CCTV cameras are fixed in her compound from Page 17 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined which the opposite compound would be clearly seen but she has not given the copy of the CCTV footage. The complainant had stated that she would prepare a CD of the footage and submit the same in the Police Station but she has not done so. During investigation, the deposition of the statement of the driver of the school van has not been recorded. The witness has admitted that there were many neighbors of different communities including college going girls staying on rent in the society but he has not recorded their statements and has not recorded the statements of Chirag Patel, Neetaben Solanki etc.
9. The accused has been charged with an offence under section 354(C) of the IPC and Section 11(iv) of the POCSO Act and it is appropriate to reproduce Section 354(C) of the IPC and Section 11(iv) of the POCSO Act, which reads as under :
Section : 354-C of the IPC "354C. Voyeurism :- Any man who watches, or captures the image of a woman engaging in a private act in circumstances where she would usually have the expectation of not being observed either by the perpetrator or by any other person at the behest of the perpetrator or disseminates such image shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than one year, but which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine, and be punished on a second or subsequent Page 18 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined conviction, with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than three years, but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation 1.--For the purpose of this section, "private act"
includes an act of watching carried out in a place which, in the circumstances, would reasonably be expected to provide privacy and where the victim's genitals, posterior or breasts are exposed or covered only in underwear; or the victim is using a lavatory; or the victim is doing a sexual act that is not of a kind ordinarily done in public.
Explanation 2.--Where the victim consents to the capture of the images or any act, but not to their dissemination to third persons and where such image or act is disseminated, such dissemination shall be considered an offence under this section."
9.1. Section ii(iv) of the POCSO Act:
"11. Sexual harassment :- A person is said to commit sexual harassment upon a child when such person with sexual intent :-
(i) XXX XXX XXX
(ii) XXX XXX XXX
(iii) XXX XXX XXX
(iv) repeatedly or constantly follows or watches or contacts a child either directly or through electronic, digital or any other means; or"
10. Voyeurism refers to the act of watching, capturing or disseminating the image of a person, particularly a woman engaged in a private act without her consent in circumstances where she has a reasonable expectation of privacy. The word "voyeur" is derived from the French term "voir", meaning to see. In legal terms, it signifies an intrusion into a person's privacy and dignity by observing or recording them during private moments. The offence of voyeurism was inserted in the Page 19 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined IPC by the Criminal Amendment Act, 2013 and the key elements of voyeurism are that the act involves watching, recording or distributing images or videos, while the victim is engaged in a private act such as dressing or using the restroom etc. while the victim has a reasonable expectation of privacy. The act is done without consent and the purpose is typically sexual gratification. To constitute an offence under Section 354(C) of the IPC, the prosecution has to prove that the offender was watching or recording a woman's private act which includes acts like photographing, filming or observing through hidden devices. The woman must be engaged in a private act such as undressing, using a restroom or engaging in sexual activity where she expects privacy. The situation must be one where the woman reasonably expects not to be observed. The act of watching, capturing or disseminating must be without the woman's consent and even sharing or publishing images captured with consent if done without permission amounts to voyeurism. So, the key factor is invasion of privacy and absence of consent.
11. In the instant case, the accused has been charged Page 20 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined with the offence under section 354(C) of the IPC mainly on the ground that the accused who was residing in front of the house of the victim was watching her with a bad intention while the victim was going out of her house to sit in the school van which was parked in front of her house. To constitute an offence of voyeurism as defined under Section 354(C) of the IPC, it is essential that the victim at the time of the offence must be engaged in a private act. Explanation-1 to Section 354(C) of the IPC defines the private act which includes an act of watching carried out in a place which in the circumstances would reasonably be expected to provide privacy and where the victim's genitals, posterior or breasts are exposed or covered only in an underwear or the victim is using a lavatory or the victim is doing a sexual act that is not of a kind ordinarily done in public. In the entire evidence on record, there is no iota of evidence that the victim was doing any private act but as per the case of the prosecution, the victim was stepping out of her house to sit in a school van to go to school and at that time, she would be fully dressed in her school uniform and not engaged in any private act. Considering the evidence on record, there are Page 21 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined major contradictions in the deposition of the complainant PW-1 Sejal Pareshkumar Shah, PW-2 Pareshkumar Kanelal Shah and PW-3 the victim. In fact, the mother and father of the victim do not state the exact place where the accused was standing but the victim states that he was standing inside his house. There is no panchnama of the place of offence on record and if the FIR is perused, the complainant has stated that the accused was standing near his house. It is not clear as to where the accused was at the time of the incident and prior to registering of the FIR, the complainant had given a written application to the police wherein she has stated that while her daughter was going to sit in the van, the accused was watching her with a bad intention but her daughter was not paying attention and this was noticed by her mother i.e. the complainant. In the written application, the complainant has stated that she told the accused not to do so and he started crying, but his wife did not come out of the house, and at that time, as it was morning time, everyone was in their own homes. Hence, in the written application, the complainant has clearly stated that there were no eye-witnesses to the incident. The neighbours PW-4 Parulben Bhadreshbhai Page 22 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined Rai and PW-7 Manojbhai Prashothambhai Patel have not supported the case of the prosecution and have deposed that they are not eye-witnesses to the incident. PW-5 Prabhudas Shankarbhai Patel who is a neighbour and residing four houses away from the house of the parties has given an exaggerated version and has stated that the accused was mocking and making fun of the victim which is not the case of the complainant. It is also on record that the complainant had access to a CCTV footage and at the time of filing of the complaint, she had told the Investigating Officer that she would give a copy of the CCTV footage in a CD but the same was not given by her. Moreover, if the incident has occurred, the best independent witness would be the van driver but the victim and the complainant have both stated that they do not know the name of the driver of the van. In the evidence, it has also come on record that the parties were having disputes between them since 29.10.2016 when an incident about bursting of crackers had taken place and the complainant had given a written application to the Vaghodiya Police Station on 30.10.2016. Thereafter, the accused had filed a complaint under Sections 323, 294(B), 506(2) Page 23 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined and 11(iv) of the IPC on 07.11.2016, which was registered at Panigate Police Station II-CR No.542 of 2010 on 07.11.2016 for the offence that had occurred on 29.10.2016 regarding the bursting of crackers. Thereafter, the accused had also filed a complaint under Section 143, 323, 354 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Atrocity Act against the victim and her parents on 03.12.2017 which was registered at Panigate Police Station I-C.R.No.0276 of 2017. It is on record that cases have been filed by the accused against the complainant and her husband and the complainant has filed this case against the accused. In the first instance, the complainant has in the written application given to the Police Station has stated that the victim was not aware of the presence of the accused and considering the contradictions in the deposition of the victims in the deposition of the victim and her parents, is no evidence that any such offence had taken place.
12. Considering the settled legal position and the facts of the case, the act of a person glancing or looking at a victim who is about to sit in a school van in a public place does not constitute voyeurism because the act of sitting in a school van is Page 24 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined a public and non-private act. At the time of the act, the victim is not engaged in an act that involves undressing, using a lavatory or any form of intimate or private activity. The public space like a street where others are present does not provide the victim a reasonable expectation of complete privacy and the offence of voyeurism would be committed only when privacy is expected such as bathrooms, bedrooms or changing rooms. As per the settled principle of law, the offence of voyeurism requires an intention or act of watching or capturing for sexual satisfaction. A mere glance or look even if momentary without such intention or act cannot amount to voyeurism. In voyeurism, the core element is the absence of consent for which for being watched or recorded in a private act and if a person is simply being looked at in a public setting does not meet this requirement. In the instant case, the act of the accused glancing or looking at the victim about to sit in a school van does not amount to voyeurism as it fails to satisfy the essential ingredient of a private act and the reasonable expectation of privacy. Such conduct does not attract any criminal liability under Section 354(C) of the IPC as the offence of voyeurism is confined strictly to acts that intrude Page 25 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined upon the personal, private and intimate sphere of an individual. The act in question occurred in a public place and the victim was not engaged in any private or intimate act and there is no evidence on record to show that the accused had attempted to intrude the privacy of the victim. The essential ingredients of Section 354(C) of the IPC are not satisfied and the act of the accused does not attract criminal liability under the provisions of the act, and hence, the accused cannot be held guilty for the offence of voyeurism either directly or through electronic digital or any other means.
13. As far as the offence under Section 11(iv) of the POCSO Act is concerned, a person is said to commit sexual harassment upon a child when he repeatedly or constantly follows or watches or contacts a child either directly or through electronic, digital or any means. In the entire evidence, there is no iota of evidence that the accused had with any sexual intention repeatedly or constantly followed or watched or contacted the victim either directly or through any electronic, digital or any other means. As stated by the complainant, the incident has occurred on 05.05.2017 at 8:15am when the minor Page 26 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined victim was going from her house to sit in their school van and besides this incident, there are no other details of any other incident narrated by the complainant or the victim that the accused was repeatedly or constantly following or watching the victim.
14. In view of the above, the learned Trial Court has appreciated the entire evidence in proper perspective and there does not appear to be any infirmity and illegality in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. The learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence and this Court is of the considered opinion that the learned Trial Court was completely justified in acquitting the accused of the charges leveled against them. The findings recorded by the Trial Court are absolutely just and proper and no illegality or infirmity has been committed by the learned Trial Court and this Court is in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and the order passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Special (POCSO) Case No. 26 of Page 27 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/223/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2025 undefined 2020 order dated 01.07.2024 and the present appeal is devoid of merits and resultantly, the same is dismissed at the stage of admission.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J) F.S.KAZI.....
Page 28 of 28 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Mon Nov 10 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 10 21:23:28 IST 2025