Navtej Singh Johar and others v. Union of India (2018) – Decriminalization of Homosexual Acts

This topic of “Navtej Singh Johar and others v. Union of India (2018) – Decriminalization of Homosexual Acts” is important from the perspective of the UPSC IAS Examination, which falls under General Studies Portion.

Introduction:

• Landmark judgment by Supreme Court of India
• Decriminalized consensual homosexual acts between adults
• Struck down Section 377 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) as unconstitutional

Background:

• Section 377, IPC: criminalized “unnatural offenses” (1861)
• Broad interpretation: included consensual homosexual acts
• Prior rulings: Delhi High Court (2009, decriminalized); Supreme Court (2013, reinstated)
• Navtej Singh Johar and others: petitioners, challenging Section 377

Arguments:

• Petitioners: Section 377 violated fundamental rights
  • Article 14: right to equality before the law
  • Article 15: prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex
  • Article 19: right to freedom of expression
  • Article 21: right to privacy and personal autonomy
• Respondents (Union of India): limited arguments, left the matter to the court’s wisdom

Issues before the court:

• Constitutionality of Section 377, IPC
• Right to privacy and personal autonomy
• Right to equality and non-discrimination
• Right to freedom of expression

Judgment:

• Five-judge bench, unanimous decision
• Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice A.M. Khanwilkar: Section 377 irrational, arbitrary, violated fundamental rights
• Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman: IPC’s failure to differentiate between consensual, non-consensual acts problematic
• Justice D.Y. Chandrachud: Section 377 perpetuated stereotypes, hindered self-expression
• Justice Indu Malhotra: LGBTQ+ community entitled to equal citizenship, protection from discrimination

Significance:

• Landmark victory for LGBTQ+ rights in India
• Decriminalization of consensual homosexual acts
• Upheld constitutional rights to privacy, equality, and freedom of expression (Articles 14, 15, 19, 21)
• Promoted social acceptance and inclusivity
• Encouraged further legal reforms related to LGBTQ+ rights