38.6c New Delhi, India, Saturday, May 18, 2024
Judiciary

Section 377: Detailed developments in the Supreme Court

By LawStreet News Network      11 July, 2018 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Section 377: Detailed developments in the Supreme Court

On July 10th, 2018 a Constitution Bench of Chief Justice of IndiaDipak Misra and Justices Rohinton Fali NarimanAM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud, and Indu Malhotra took up petitions for hearing to settle the question of the constitutionality of Section 377 IPC.

On the first day of the hearing, Justice Chandrachud, who is part of the five-judge Bench said that the choice of a partner is a person’s fundamental right, and it can be a same-sex partner. The statement came on a submission made by senior advocate Arvind Datar, for hotelier Keshav Suri, that the right to sexual orientation was meaningless without the right to choose a partner.

Justice Chandrachud referred to the March 2018 judgment in the Hadiya case, which held that neither the state nor one’s parents could influence an adult’s choice of partner. That would be a violation of the fundamental right to privacy.

Further, during the hearing, the judges appeared to differ in their approach to the case. Chief Justice Misra said the question which needs to be settled first is whether Section 377 is in conformity with Article 21, 19 and 14 of the Constitution.

“Let us get out of this maze. We cannot now give an advance ruling on questions like inheritance to live-in-partners, whether they can marry, etc. Those are individual issues we cannot prejudge” he said.

However, Justice Chandrachud said that the court should not confine itself merely to the question of constitutionality and it could examine the wider concept of “sexuality” to include co-habitation etc.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Choreographer Navtej Singh, brought to the attention of the court 172 Law Commission Report which recommended the deletion of Section 377. But nothing had been done all these years.

Further, he said that the government did not support Section 377 as no appeal was filed against the historic Delhi High Court judgment of 2010 which declared Section 377 as unconstitutional. In fact, a review petition was filed against the apex court judgment of December 2013.

Conforming the above statement, the Centre today filed an affidavit in the court, informing that it would not contest the petitions challenging Section 377 as far as they relate to consensual sex between two adults and not the corollary rights of the LGBTQ community, such as those related to the marriage.

The Centre’s affidavit said, “Considering the issues, if any if permitted to be raised beyond the scope of the reference, the same would require a detailed counter affidavit showing legitimate state interest on various other issues. Such an exercise could obviously not be undertaken without wider consultations in the government.

In the most respectful submission of the Union of India, allowing any other issue (other than constitutional validity of Section 377) to be argued and adjudicating the same with giving an opportunity to the Union of India to file a counter affidavit to the Union of India may not be in the interest of justice and would be violative of principles of natural justice.”

To this, Justice Chandrachud assured the Centre that the Court was not considering civil rights of homosexual persons, but was only examining the need to de-criminalise consensual sex between adults.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

fundamental-right-to-health-includes-consumers-right-to-be-made-aware-of-quality-of-products-sc
Trending Judiciary
Fundamental right to health includes consumers' right to be made aware of quality of products: SC [Read Order]

Right to health includes consumers' right to know product quality. Advertisers must submit self-declarations for ads to ensure transparency and accountability: SC

17 May, 2024 01:43 PM
sc-asks-ed-to-file-response-to-sorens-plea-for-interim-on-may-20
Trending Judiciary
SC asks ED to file response to Soren's plea for interim on May 20

SC asks ED to file a response by May 20 to Hemant Soren's plea for interim bail during Lok Sabha elections, with a hearing scheduled for May 21.

17 May, 2024 06:12 PM

TOP STORIES

indian-courts-this-week-law-street-journals-weekly-round-up-of-sc-hcs-may-6-may-10
Trending Judiciary
Indian Courts this Week: Law Street Journal's Weekly Round-Up of SC & HCs [May 6 - May 10]

Get the latest updates from India's Supreme Court and the High Courts ! Here’s a round up of the week's top legal stories in a quick, easy-to-read summary.

13 May, 2024 10:29 AM
sc-dismisses-union-govt-plea-against-bail-to-maoist-financer-in-case-of-attack-on-police-party-in-jharkhand
Trending Judiciary
SC dismisses Union govt's plea against bail to Maoist financer in case of attack on police party in Jharkhand [Read Judgment]

SC rejects govt's plea against bail for accused in Jharkhand police attack case, citing absence of violated bail conditions.

13 May, 2024 11:33 AM
supreme-court-upholds-gang-rape-conviction-though-victim-turned-hostile
Trending Judiciary
Supreme Court upholds gang rape conviction, though victim turned hostile [Read Judgment]

SC upholds gang rape conviction despite victim's hostility, affirming witness credibility in criminal trials.

13 May, 2024 12:24 PM
sanatana-dharma-remarks-sc-seeks-response-from-up-maha-ktka-bihar-jamp;k-on-udhayanidhis-plea-for-clubbing-firs
Trending Judiciary
Sanatana Dharma remarks SC seeks response from UP, Maha, Ktka, Bihar, J&K on Udhayanidhi's plea for clubbing FIRs

SC seeks response on Udhayanidhi's plea for clubbing FIRs related to his remarks on 'Sanatan Dharma'.

13 May, 2024 12:39 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email