MUMBAI, July 11 — India’s legal framework against stalking, a crime that entered the statute books just over a decade ago, is facing a fresh test as the Rohit Chandel case draws national attention. The case, which invokes Section 78 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) of 2023, alleges repeated calls to a 16-year-old girl from Chandel’s own number and other phone numbers. For the technology and business desks tracking legal risk in India’s digital economy, the case underscores how a relatively modern criminal provision is being applied in an era of ubiquitous mobile connectivity.
The criminalisation of stalking in India dates to 2013, following the Nirbhaya case, when the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was amended to introduce Section 354D. That section defined stalking as following, contacting, or attempting to contact a person repeatedly despite clear disinterest, causing fear or distress. Penalties were set at up to three years imprisonment. The BNS, enacted in 2023, replaced the IPC, with Section 78 now covering the same offence and carrying similar penalties. The Rohit Chandel case is among the first high-profile matters to test this new statutory language.
The case also brings the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act into play, as the alleged victim is a minor. The POCSO Act adds additional protections for minors, a layer that prosecutors in this matter are expected to invoke alongside Section 78. Legal analysts note that the dual application of stalking and child protection laws in such cases often sharpens judicial scrutiny of evidence, particularly around phone records and call logs.
India has seen other celebrity stalking cases that drew public attention to legal procedures and victim rights. In 2018, a fan was arrested for stalking actress Shraddha Kapoor. In 2023, a man was arrested for stalking actress Mrunal Thakur. Each case, according to legal observers, has incrementally shaped how law enforcement handles complaints under Section 354D and now Section 78, particularly regarding the standard of proof for “repeated” contact and “clear disinterest.”
For the broader Asian market, the Rohit Chandel case arrives as several regional jurisdictions are updating their cyber-harassment and stalking laws. India’s BNS framework, with its explicit digital-age language around contacting and attempting to contact, is being watched by legal tech firms and compliance officers across South Asia. The ministry has not commented on whether the case will prompt any further clarification of Section 78’s provisions.
The case is now before the courts. Legal experts say the proceedings will likely test the evidentiary thresholds for stalking under the BNS, particularly around multiple phone numbers and the definition of “repeated” contact. For investors and companies monitoring India’s legal environment, the outcome may signal how aggressively the new criminal code treats technology-enabled harassment.
