IPC 509 vs BNS 79: Insulting a Woman's Modesty Explained (2026)

In India, Section 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) replaced Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) on 1 July 2024. The offence and its punishment — simple imprisonment up to three years and fine — are unchanged; the only textual change is "exhibits any object in any form".

At a glance

IPC	BNS	Offence	Punishment (BNS text)	Classification (BNSS First Schedule)	Change
509	79	Word, sound, gesture or object intended to insult the modesty of a woman, or intrusion on her privacy	Simple imprisonment up to 3 years, and fine	Cognizable; bailable; any Magistrate	Minor edit

The CrPC First Schedule classified Section 509 IPC as cognizable, bailable and triable by any Magistrate (the bail and court columns read "Ditto", traced upward to the Section 506 and 508 entries). Compounding is unchanged: with the court's permission, by the woman (Section 359(2) BNSS; Section 320(2) CrPC).

What changed

Minor edit — "in any form": "or exhibits any object" becomes "or exhibits any object in any form". No other word of the offence changes. The IPC wording already placed no limit on the object. Whether the added words widen the offence has not been construed in any judgment read for this page, so the change is labelled a minor edit.
Identical — punishment: "simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, and also with fine". This wording was introduced into Section 509 IPC by Act 13 of 2013, with effect from 3 February 2013. It replaced "simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both". The BNS carries forward the post-2013 text.
Modified — placement: Section 509 sat in IPC Chapter XXII, "Of criminal intimidation, insult and annoyance". Section 79 sits in BNS Chapter V, "Of offences against woman and child", under the sub-heading "Of criminal force and assault against woman", next to Sections 74 to 78.
Modified — procedural references: the BNSS provisions that give a woman complainant procedural protection now list Section 79 BNS in place of Section 509 IPC — recording of information (Section 173(1), formerly Section 154(1) CrPC), recording of her statement (Section 180(3), formerly Section 161(3)), statement before a Magistrate (Section 183(6)(a), formerly Section 164(5A)(a)) and no sanction for a public servant (Section 218(1), formerly Section 197(1)). Section 183(6)(a) reads "the Magistrate" where Section 164(5A)(a) CrPC read "the Judicial Magistrate".
Not carried over — State amendment: the India Code IPC text prints a Chhattisgarh amendment (Chhattisgarh Act 25 of 2015) inserting Sections 509A (sexual harassment by relative) and 509B (sexual harassment by electronic mode). Section 79 in the Gazette text has no such additions. Whether any State has since amended the BNS is not covered here.

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Extract, Section 509 IPC (repealed from 1 July 2024):

Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any words, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen, by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, and also with fine.

Extract, Section 79 BNS:

Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any words, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object in any form, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen, by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, and also with fine.

How it works — the ingredients

Section 79 has one mental element and two alternative kinds of act.

Intent — the accused must act "intending to insult the modesty of any woman". "Woman" means "a female human being of any age" (Section 2(35) BNS, as Section 10 IPC provided). The offence is framed with "Whoever", so the accused may be of any gender.
Either an expressive act aimed at her — uttering words, making a sound or gesture, or exhibiting an object in any form, with the further intention that the word or sound "shall be heard", or the gesture or object "shall be seen", by that woman;
Or intrusion — intruding upon the privacy of that woman, with the same intent to insult her modesty.

Two features follow from the text. First, the words, sound, gesture or object must be meant for that woman to hear or see; the section speaks of "such woman". Second, no physical contact is required. Where the accused assaults or uses criminal force, the offence moves to Section 74 BNS (formerly Section 354 IPC), which carries one to five years' imprisonment and fine.

Neighbouring offences:

Section 75 BNS (formerly 354A IPC) — sexual harassment by "a man", including "making sexually coloured remarks" (clause (iv)), punishable with up to one year, or fine, or both (Section 75(3)).
Section 77 BNS (voyeurism, formerly 354C) and Section 78 BNS (stalking, formerly 354D), which cover watching or capturing images of a woman's private act, and following or monitoring her online.
Section 352 BNS (formerly 504 IPC) — intentional insult to provoke a breach of the peace, which is not limited to women and does not require an intent to insult modesty.

On a reading of these provisions, the same facts may engage more than one section, and the charge should be framed on the ingredients the evidence shows.

What this means in practice

For the woman making the complaint

The offence is cognizable, so information is recorded under Section 173(1) BNSS. Section 173(3) covers offences punishable for three years or more but less than seven years; on a reading of that text, it lets the officer in charge, with prior permission of a Deputy Superintendent of Police or above, hold a preliminary enquiry of up to fourteen days first. The first proviso to Section 173(1) requires information given by the woman to be recorded by a woman police officer or any woman officer. The second proviso provides for recording at her residence or a place of her choice if she is temporarily or permanently mentally or physically disabled.
Section 183(6)(a) BNSS requires a Magistrate to record her statement "as soon as the commission of the offence is brought to the notice of the police". The proviso says it shall, as far as practicable, be recorded by a woman Magistrate.
The complaint should record the actual words, sound, gesture or object, when and where it happened, and how it was directed at her. Madhushree Datta (below) shows that a bare allegation of "filthy language" may not be enough.
She may compound the offence with the court's permission (Section 359(2) BNSS).

For the investigating officer

The statement of the woman during investigation is to be recorded by a woman police officer or any woman officer (proviso to Section 180(3) BNSS).
Where the accused is a public servant, the third proviso to Section 218(1) BNSS says no sanction is required for an offence under Section 79.

For the accused and defence advocate

The offence is bailable: under Section 478(1) BNSS a person who is prepared to give bail "shall be released on bail".
The case turns on intent. The defence can test whether the words or acts alleged were aimed at insulting the woman's modesty, as against a quarrel, a workplace dispute or general abuse (see Madhushree Datta).
Section 479(1) BNSS (release after detention for one-half of the maximum term, or one-third for a first-time offender) applies because the offence does not carry death or life imprisonment. On a reading of the text, one-half of three years is eighteen months.

Judgments that still matter

State of Punjab v. Major Singh, [1966] Supp. 1 S.C.R. 286 (1966 INSC 115) — 28 April 1966. A three-Judge Bench, by majority (Mudholkar and Bachawat JJ.; Sarkar C.J. dissenting), altered a conviction to one under Section 354 IPC for an assault on a female child of seven and a half months. Bachawat J. held: "from her very birth she possesses the modesty which is the attribute of her sex." Mudholkar J. held that an act "clearly suggestive of sex according to the common notions of mankind" falls within Section 354. The case construed Section 354, not Section 509. It is the source of the understanding of "modesty" that later decisions applied to Section 509 (see Rupan Deol Bajaj). The report shows no paragraph numbers.

Rupan Deol Bajaj and Anr. v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill and Anr., [1995] Supp. 4 S.C.R. 237 (1995 INSC 616) — 12 October 1995. Dr. A. S. Anand and M. K. Mukherjee JJ. held that the allegations in an FIR against a senior police officer, for slapping a woman officer on her posterior at a dinner party, prima facie disclosed offences under Sections 354 and 509 IPC. Drawing on Major Singh, the Court held that the test is whether the offender's action "is capable of shocking the sense of decency of a woman". It rejected the plea that the harm was so slight as to fall under Section 95 IPC (now Section 33 BNS). The Court set aside the High Court's quashing of the FIR and directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate to take cognizance under Sections 354 and 509. The body of the report shows no paragraph numbers.

Madhushree Datta v. State of Karnataka & Anr., [2025] 2 S.C.R. 187 (2025 INSC 105) — 24 January 2025. Dipankar Datta and Prashant Kumar Mishra JJ. quashed a chargesheet under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 509 IPC arising from an employment dispute. Relying on Rupan Deol Bajaj, the Court held that the question is whether any act "was intended to shock the sense of decency of the complainant being a woman" (para 27). The term "filthy language", "without any contextual framework or accompanying words", does not fall within Section 509 (para 28). The allegation appeared only in the chargesheet and not in the complaint or FIR (paras 31-32, 40), and the chargesheet and proceedings were quashed (para 45). The case applied the IPC; Section 79 BNS repeats the words it construed.

Which law applies to your case

Section 358(2) BNS keeps alive any penalty or punishment incurred under the IPC and allows proceedings to be instituted, continued or enforced "as if that Code had not been repealed". On a reading of that provision, conduct before 1 July 2024 is charged under Section 509 IPC. Procedure for matters pending on that date continues under the CrPC (Section 531(2)(a) BNSS). Article 20(1) of the Constitution bars a penalty greater than the law in force at the time of the offence. The maximum is the same in both provisions, so on a reading of that Article the choice of provision does not change the sentence. See which law applies to an offence before 1 July 2024.

Frequently asked questions

What is the BNS equivalent of Section 509 IPC? Section 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 replaces Section 509 IPC from 1 July 2024. It punishes words, sounds, gestures or objects intended to insult the modesty of a woman, and intrusion on her privacy, with simple imprisonment up to three years and fine. The only textual change is that 'exhibits any object' now reads 'exhibits any object in any form'.

What is the punishment under Section 79 BNS? Simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, and also fine. The fine is not an alternative; the section says 'and also with fine'. This is the same as Section 509 IPC after its 2013 amendment by Act 13 of 2013, which raised the maximum from one year and made fine mandatory.

Is Section 79 BNS bailable and cognizable? The First Schedule to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 lists Section 79 BNS as cognizable, bailable and triable by any Magistrate. The CrPC First Schedule classified Section 509 IPC the same way. Because the maximum is three years, on a reading of Section 173(3) BNSS the officer in charge may, with prior permission of an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, first hold a preliminary enquiry of up to fourteen days.

Can a case under Section 79 BNS be compromised? Yes, with the court's permission. Section 359(2) BNSS lists Section 79 BNS as compoundable by the woman whom it was intended to insult or whose privacy was intruded upon, with the permission of the court before which the prosecution is pending. Section 320(2) CrPC treated Section 509 IPC the same way.

Can a man be charged under Section 79 BNS for abusive language alone? Only if the words were intended to insult the woman's modesty. In Madhushree Datta v. State of Karnataka (2025 INSC 105), the Supreme Court held that an allegation of 'filthy language', without the specific words, context or accompanying gestures showing that intent, does not fall within Section 509 IPC, and quashed the proceedings. Section 79 BNS repeats the same ingredients.

Who records the complaint of a woman under Section 79 BNS? Under the first proviso to Section 173(1) BNSS, information given by the woman against whom an offence under Section 79 BNS is alleged must be recorded by a woman police officer or any woman officer. Her statement during investigation is also to be recorded by a woman officer (Section 180(3) BNSS), and a Magistrate must record her statement under Section 183(6)(a) BNSS as soon as the offence is brought to police notice.

Which law applies to an insult to modesty before 1 July 2024? Section 358(2) BNS lets proceedings for an offence under the IPC be instituted or continued as if the Code had not been repealed, so on a reading of that text conduct before 1 July 2024 is charged under Section 509 IPC. The punishment is the same under both provisions, so Article 20(1) of the Constitution does not produce a different sentence on a reading of that Article.

Sources

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Sections 2(35), 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 352 and 358, and the Chapter V headings.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (India Code text): Sections 10 and 509 with the Act 13 of 2013 footnote and the Chhattisgarh State amendment.
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Sections 173(1), 180(3), 183(6)(a), 218(1), 359(2), 479 and 531, and the First Schedule entry for Section 79 BNS.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Sections 154(1), 161(3), 164(5A)(a), 197(1) and 320(2), and the First Schedule entry for Section 509 IPC.
Constitution of India: Article 20(1).
Judgments read in full text: State of Punjab v. Major Singh (S_1966_1_286_295_EN.md); Rupan Deol Bajaj v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill (S_1995_4_237_260_EN.md); Madhushree Datta v. State of Karnataka (2025_2_187_202_EN.md).

This page explains the statutory text and the judgments cited as they stand. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.

Section 509 IPC vs Section 79 BNS — Word, Gesture or Act Intended to Insult the Modesty of a Woman