Delhi High Court Decriminalizes Homosexuality

Thank God for secular Indian Courts!! This judgement was long overdue!! Congratulations India for moving forward

"Interestingly, in the new team of law officers appointed by the government, at least two of them â€" attorney general Goolam Vahanvati and additional solicitor general Indira Jaising â€"- have publicly supported the demand for decriminalizing homosexuality"
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Delhi-High-Court-legalizes-homosexuality/articleshow/4726608.cms


1) so government supports it , why then back peddle on religious issues?

2)will government also remove discrimination in domestic violence laws as it is important not to distinguish the sex of the partner? given domestic relationship sans marriage has been established.
if man-woman unmarried relationship is covered, why should a woman-woman unmarried relationship be discriminated or for the matter why should men be excluded from enjoying domestic rights?

What did the judges say:

A bench of Chief Justice Ajit Prakash Shah and Justice S Muralidhar said that if not amended, section 377 of the IPC would violate Article 21 of the Indian constitution, which states that every citizen has equal opportunity of life and is equal before law.

"It cannot be forgotten that discrimination is antithesis of equality and that it is the recognition of equality which will foster dignity of every individual," the bench said in its 105-page judgement.

What about dignity and equal rights for people, who are jailed in false cases of laws specifically made for women? What does these judges or Additional Solicitor general Indira Jaisingh, (who drafted one such law) have to say?

Old people, women and even children are jailed without evidence and trial and judges in delhi never seemed to have above noble thoughts for them.

Recently, a 2-month old baby was arrested for dowry harassment to a woman and got bail in our great city Mumbai.

What happened to equality and individual dignity of that 2-month old baby?

Double Standards and political correctness is everywhere. If equality and individual dignity is so important then why people are being punished before trial and why they are defamed.

India changes this anti-gay law to fool the world that it has got a modern judiciary and to hide grave human rights violations and state terrorism by India.

A country which arrests 2-month of old baby, is not a democracy. It is a terrorist state.

And when will India stop arresting 2-month old children?

http://www.mid-day.com/news/2009/jun/210609-Zoya-two-month-old-girl-anticipatory-bail-dowry-harrassment-case-youngest-accused-Mumbai-news.htm

Aaman,

I'm puzzled. In the other article on this subject, it mentions other High Courts ruling on section of the Indian Criminal Code. Does this mean that it was a State High Court ruling on Union Law? Is this common in India, where States rule on Union law and you have different interpretations according to the jurisdiction?

slime, sumanth... please stay on topic

This is indeed good news. We can't discriminate against people solely based on their sexual preference, religion, race or nationality. It is high time.

Ravi

Ruvy,

Indians are puzzled since decades about working of Indian legal system and chaos inside.

The State High Court ruling is specific to a particular case and its maximum relevance is its usage as a citation in other courts cases ( in state/province high courts or smaller courts) unless law is changed or Supreme court of India gives similar judgments.

Courts can give judgments and rulings which are exceptions or are different from what Union law says. This particular ruling is an exception and it has to be considered as one till the law is formally changed in parliament or supreme court endorses it.

It is interesting to see, if one of the parties in this case goes to Indian Supreme Court challenging the current ruling. This can force Supreme Court to take a clear stand and make it more formal.

This ruling by Delhi high court may not change the way other courts work or give judgments till law is formally changed.

This is fantastic! Great news. Oh what jubilation there must be among our desi homosexual friends! I'm so very happy for them. I hope social acceptance too comes with this milestone. Thanks for the article Aaman.

lets hope that the LGBT political correctness BS dont start in india

So, let me see if I have this clear.

This decision, declaring a portion of the Indian Penal Code unconstituional applies only within the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court? Elsewhere, it will not apply unless the Union Parliament changes section 377, or the Indian Supreme Court declares it unconstitutional?

Comparative government is a particular interest of mine, and I'm trying to comprehend how this decision applies to the within the Indian Union.

Ruvy, that is correct, although generally speaking, other State-level courts will likely stay away from this topic until either the Government changes the law or the Supreme Court, through a writ of mandamus pulls this issue towards itself, or one of the parties in this case appeals.

yes its true, outside delhi men can still be prosecuted for having anal sex. only Delhavi gays can have anal sex for now.

but this is a good start. ive heard delhi has the highest concentration of gays in india. so if dlehi can do it so can all of india!!

hey psingh are you so ignorant that you think this is only about anal sex? grow up. this is about the right to LOVE who you want. there is much more at stake here than anal sex.

reality check:

this is a small but significant victory in a long journey and the road ahead is by no means easy

Ruvy,

I disagree with Sumanth.

Indian law jurisdiction of Delhi High Court or any other High court or even lower court judgement is a judgement mandatory across the board. If someone has a copy of this high court judgement with him then if he is arrested by police under section 377 ( mainly done on extortion, religious reasons), the police cant ignore this ( even in another state)

The issue is awareness among police and the FIR lodgers that they cant misuse this law.

There are state amendments to each law. Then if there is a conflict, that high court of that state government can check. There as Sumanth says, the particularness of the case comes in.

So it is both, particular to case as well across the board.

Ruvy

I think legally, the only place it can be challenged is in the supreme court. The only debate in the supreme court if at all will be the applicability of article 21 in this case. I donot think it was inappropriate to apply article 21 here. However, what will be interesting is if other cases are brought about making this judgement a case in point. The issues could include

a. Adultery
b. Pornography
c. Consensual Incest

The judgement itself is more significant than the law as clearly detailed by Aaman in this article.

its good that ppl are recognizing that tolerance for homosexuals is needed because homosexuality, in addition to being a lifestyle choice for some, it is often HARDWIRED.

new research shows that gayness is determined from birth. there are striking similarities between the brains of gay men and straight women & between lesbians and straight men.

the effeminate type men who act like women and often feel trapped inside a wrong body....no they dont make a choice....they dont LEARN THEIR GENDER. its inborn

this raises another question....
if homosexuality and thus GENDER is hardwired by birth and not LEARNED and not a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT then are the GENDER FEMINISTS who claim that gender is purely a social construct and that they want boys and girls to be raised in a gender neutral environment to achieve a genderless society, speaking out of their BEHINDS??

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/nightwaves/pip/5ufx6/

what i find most amazing is that hardly anybody is criticizing this development. I mean, being gay and all, i was under the impression that there are many homophobic people in our country... i guess not many of them go online or talk to the media...

psingh, do you guys like making this stuff up or are you just bored nearly to death. honestly, this is so old. if there are feminists who believe what you claim, they certainly are on the fringe.

Thanks to those of you who provided answers to my questions. Federations are interesting political animals to study, and how the powers of governance separate out in different federations is always fascinating to see.

Can someone will explain Which 'Intimate partner violence law" like Dv Act or IPC 498a will be applicable to these couples now?

Suresh,

how about ur try it urself and let us know. there is no dearth of men amongst sniffers.

This is a serious issue and the effort of lots of people, NAZ foundation who in unity and honesty have achieved what they set out.

Stop spamming all threads with ur false cries!

Civil union rights is must for gay rights to be credible.

smallsquirrel

you didnt get me, i mean the gender feminists are idiots for wanting a genderless society.

oh I got you alright psingh, and my point is that I think you could count the number of these so-called "feminists" (we mainstreamers certainly don't claim them) on one hand. my point is that you are making a mountain out of a mole hill.