Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation

Last updated

Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation
Emblem of the Supreme Court of India.svg
Court Supreme Court of India
Full case name Suresh Kumar Koushal and Anr. v. Naz Foundation and Ors.
Decided11 December 2013
Citation Civil Appeal No. 10972 of 2013
Case history
Appealed from Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi by High Court of Delhi
Court membership
Judges sitting G. S. Singhvi J. and S. J. Mukhopadhaya J.
Case opinions
Section 377 is constitutional; Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi overturned upon appeal.
Decision by G. S. Singhvi J.
Laws applied
Overruled by
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018)
Keywords
Criminalization of Homosexuality

Suresh Kumar Koushal &Anr. v. NAZ Foundation &Ors.(2013) is a case in which a 2 judge Supreme Court bench consisting of G. S. Singhvi and S. J. Mukhopadhaya overturned the Delhi High Court case Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and reinstated Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. The Supreme Court of India decided to revisit this judgement after several curative petitions were filed against it, in 2017. [1] Thereby in 2018, Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, a 5 judge bench of the Supreme Court overturned this judgement, decriminalizing homosexuality. [2] Portions of Section 377 relating to sex with minors, non-consensual sexual acts such as rape, and bestiality remain in force. [3]

Contents

Decision

The judgement of the Supreme Court of India of 11 December 2013 did not find enough reason for portions of section 377 to be declared unconstitutional and overturned the Delhi High Court judgement Section 377 - CIVIL APPEAL NO.10972 OF 2013 Judgement.pdf
The judgement of the Supreme Court of India of 11 December 2013 did not find enough reason for portions of section 377 to be declared unconstitutional and overturned the Delhi High Court judgement

The judges stated that "a miniscule fraction of the country's population constitutes lesbians, gays, bisexuals or transgenders" and that the High Court had erroneously relied upon international precedents "in its anxiety to protect the so-called rights of LGBT persons". On 11 December 2013, the Supreme Court of India set aside the 2009 judgement given by the Delhi High Court stating that judicial intervention was not required in this issue. This in effect recriminalized sexual intercourse "against the order of nature". In its judgment the Supreme court bench of justices G. S. Singhvi and S. J. Mukhopadhaya stated —

"In view of the above discussion, we hold that Section 377 IPC does not suffer from the vice of unconstitutionality and the declaration made by the Division Bench of the High court is legally unsustainable." [4]

The two judges however noted that the Parliament should debate and decide on the matter. A bench of justices upheld the constitutional validity of Section 377 of Indian Penal Code that makes anal sex a punishable offense. [5]

Responses

Days later and influenced by the Devyani Khobragade incident, former Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha called for the arrest of same-sex companions of US diplomats, citing the Supreme Court of India's recent upholding of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. [6] [7] The recriminalization of gay sex comes under fire from World leaders. The United Nations human rights chief Navi Pillay [8] voiced her disappointment at the re-criminalization of consensual same-sex relationships in India, calling it "a significant step backwards" for the country. In the wake of Indian Supreme Court's ruling that gay sex is illegal, UN chief Ban Ki-moon [9] stressed on the need for equality and opposed any discrimination against lesbians, gays and bisexuals. [10]

Transgender Rights activist Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli intervened in Case in the Supreme Court in 2014 in which she highlighted the deleterious effects of conversion or reparative therapy on queer people through her affidavit. [11]

Soon after the judgement, Sonia Gandhi, President of the then ruling Indian National Congress, asked Parliament to do away with section 377. Her son and Congress Party vice-president, Rahul Gandhi also wanted section-377 to go and supported gay rights. [12]

In July 2014, Minister of State for Home Kiren Rijiju in the BJP led Central government told the Lok Sabha in a written reply that a decision regarding Section 377 of IPC can be taken only after pronouncement of judgement by the Supreme Court. [13] However, on 13 January 2015, BJP spokesperson Shaina NC, appearing on NDTV, stated, "We [BJP] are for decriminalizing homosexuality. That is the progressive way forward." [14]

Central government

The central government led by Indian National Congress filed a review petition on 21 December 2013. In its review petition the Centre said: "The judgment suffers from errors apparent on the face of the record, and is contrary to well-established principles of law laid down by the apex Court enunciating the width and ambit of Fundamental Rights under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution." The IPC, when enacted in 1860, was justified; but with the passage of time it had become arbitrary and unreasonable, the petition added. [15] Naz Foundation also filed a review petition against the Supreme Court order on Section 377. [16] On 28 January 2014 Supreme Court dismissed the review Petition filed by Central Government, NGO Naz Foundation and several others, against its 11 December verdict on Section 377 of IPC. [17] [18]

Protest on social media

Actor Imran Khan took action in order to disabuse homophobic people from their mistaken notions of homosexuality in a satire video. [19] Many Mumbai film industry personalities such as Amitabh Bachchan, Aamir Khan, Celina Jaitley, Twinkle Khanna, John Abraham, Karan Johar, Farhan Akhtar, Riteish Deshmukh, [20] Shruti Haasan, Sonam Kapoor, Anushka Sharma, [21] commented against the ruling. Many other well known persons, including Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen, and writer Vikram Seth, protested against the supreme court ruling. [22]

See also


Similar landmark decisions

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indian Penal Code</span> Erstwhile Penal code of Republic of India

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) was the official criminal code in the Republic of India, inherited from British India after independence, until it was repealed and replaced by Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) in December 2023, which came into effect on 1 July 2024. It was a comprehensive code intended to cover all substantive aspects of criminal law. The code was drafted on the recommendations of the first Law Commission of India established in 1834 under the Charter Act of 1833 under the chairmanship of Thomas Babington Macaulay. It came into force in the subcontinent during the British rule in 1862. However, it did not apply automatically in the Princely states, which had their own courts and legal systems until the 1940s. While in force, the IPC was amended several times and was supplemented by other criminal provisions.

Section 377 is a British colonial penal code that criminalized all sexual acts "against the order of nature". The law was used to prosecute people engaging in oral and anal sex along with homosexual activity. As per a Supreme Court Judgement since 2018, the Indian Penal Code Section 377 is used to convict non-consensual sexual activities among homosexuals with a minimum of ten years’ imprisonment extended to life imprisonment. It has been used to criminalize third gender people, such as the apwint in Myanmar. In 2018, then British Prime Minister Theresa May acknowledged how the legacies of such British colonial anti-sodomy laws continue to persist today in the form of discrimination, violence, and even death.

Homosexuality in India is socially permitted by most of the traditional native philosophies of the nation, and legal rights continue to be advanced in mainstream politics and regional politics. Homosexual cohabitation is also legally permitted and comes with some legal protections and rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBTQ rights in India</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people in India face legal and social challenges not experienced by non-LGBTQ people. There are no legal restrictions against gay sex or gay expression within India. Same-sex couples have some limited cohabitation rights, colloquially known as live-in relationships. However, India does not currently provide for common law marriages, same-sex marriage, civil unions, guardianship or issue partnership certificates.

<i>Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi</i> Indian LGBT Rights Case

Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (2009) is a landmark Indian case decided by a two-judge bench of the Delhi High Court, which held that treating consensual homosexual sex between adults as a crime is a violation of fundamental rights protected by India's Constitution. The verdict resulted in the decriminalization of homosexual acts involving consenting adults throughout India. This was later overturned by the Supreme Court of India in Suresh Kumar Koushal vs. Naz Foundation, in which a 2 judge bench reinstated Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. However, even that was overturned by a 5 judge bench in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India in 2018, decriminalizing homosexuality once again.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBTQ history in India</span>

LGBTQ people are well documented in various artworks and literary works of Ancient India, with evidence that homosexuality and transsexuality were accepted by the major dharmic religions. Hinduism and the various religions derived from it were not homophobic and evidence suggests that homosexuality thrived in ancient India until the medieval period. Hinduism describes a third gender that is equal to other genders and documentation of the third gender are found in ancient Hindu and Buddhist medical texts. The term "third gender" is sometimes viewed as a specifically South Asian term, and this third gender is also found throughout South Asia and East Asia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBTQ culture in India</span>

India has a long and ancient tradition of culture associated with the LGBTQ community, with many aspects that differ markedly from modern liberal western culture.

Aditya Bandopadhyay is a lawyer and LGBTQ rights activist in India, helping to challenge anti-sodomy laws, establishing advocacy organizations and providing legal services to HIV/AIDS organizations.

G.S. Singhvi is a retired judge of the Supreme Court of India. He retired on 11 December 2013.

Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya is a former justice of the Supreme Court of India. He was also chair of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal from 1 June 2016 to 14 March 2020. He previously served as Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court and also served as acting Chief Justice at the Jharkhand High Court and the Madras High Court.

AIDS Bhedbhav Virodhi Andolan was the first HIV/AIDS activist movement in India founded in 1988 in New Delhi. The group received popular recognition with the publication of its pioneering report "Less than Gay" in 1991. Through this report, ABVA advocated for civil rights of LGBTQ people to include same sex marriage, LGBT parenting, and the decriminalization of homosexuality through the repeal of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. In 1994, ABVA filed the first petition challenging the constitutionality of Section 377 in the Delhi High Court, in order to challenge prison authorities' ban on condom distribution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Kerala</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in Kerala face legal and social difficulties not experienced by non-LGBT persons. However, Kerala has been at the forefront of LGBT issues in India after Tamil Nadu. It became one of the first states in India to establish a welfare policy for the transgender community and in 2016, proposed implementing free gender affirmation surgery through government hospitals. Same-sex sexual activity has been legal since 2018, following the Supreme Court ruling in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India. In addition, numerous LGBT-related events have been held across Kerala, including in Kochi and Thiruvananthapuram. However, there is also increasing opposition to LGBT rights recently as evidenced by the anti-LGBT campaigns spearheaded by meninist groups and Muslim organisations like Indian Union Muslim League, Samastha and Jamaat-e-Islami.

<i>Puttaswamy v. Union of India</i> Indian Fundamental Rights Case Law

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) &Anr. vs. Union of India &Ors. (2017), commonly known as the Right to Privacy verdict, is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India, which held that the right to privacy is protected as a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The original petitioner Justice K.S. Puttaswamy was former judge of the Karnataka High Court

Tamil sexual minorities are Tamil people who do not conform to heterosexual gender norms. They may identify as LGBTQIA. It has been estimated that India has a population of 2.5 million homosexuals, though not all of them are Tamil, and not all Tamils live in India.

<i>Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India</i> Indian LGBT Rights Case Law

Navtej Singh Johar &Ors. v. Union of India thr. Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice (2018) is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India that decriminalised all consensual sex among adults, including homosexual sex.

Arundhati Katju is a lawyer qualified to practice in India and New York. She has litigated many notable cases at the Supreme Court of India and the Delhi High Court, including the Section 377 case, the case of a trans man being illegally confined by his parents, the Augusta Westland bribery case, the 2G spectrum corruption case and the Jessica Lal murder case. Her law practice encompasses white-collar defence, general civil litigation, and public interest cases.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indradhanu</span> A queer social club in India

Indradhanu is the official LGBTQIA+ collective of Indian Institute of Technology Delhi. The student-driven collective aims to create a safe space for LGBT+ persons in the institute's campus. Members from Indradhanu have also been petitioners in the decriminalisation of homosexuality in India. In December 2021, it was accorded official recognition by the college administration. It now holds a nominated position in the Student Affairs Council of IIT Delhi and works with the office of Diversity and Inclusion, IIT Delhi.

<i>Ujjawal v. State of Haryana</i> Indian LGBT Rights Case

Ujjawal &Anr. versus State of Haryana&Ors.(2021), a case where Punjab and Haryana High Court, refused to provide police protection to a couple facing threat to their lives and personal liberty, citing potential disruption to "social fabric of the society."

Saurabh Kirpal is an Indian lawyer, author and a senior advocate at the Delhi High Court. He is also an LGBTQ rights activist.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indian Coming Out Day</span> LGBT Awareness day in Iran, 2 July

Indian Coming Out Day is an annual LGBT awareness day observed on 2 July, to support anyone coming out of the closet. This day is celebrated in commemoration of Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi case which resulted in the decriminalisation of homosexual sexual activity in India by reading down of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code by the Delhi High Court.

References

  1. ↑ Rajagopal, Krishnadas (5 September 2017). "SC likely to hear curative pleas against Sec 377 on September 8". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X . Retrieved 7 September 2018.
  2. ↑ "'Gay sex is not a crime,' says Supreme Court in historic judgment - Times of India ►". The Times of India. Retrieved 7 September 2018.
  3. ↑ Pundir, Pallavi. "I Am What I Am. Take Me as I Am". Vice News . Retrieved 8 September 2018.
  4. ↑ http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=41070 [ dead link ]
  5. ↑ "Homosexuality is criminal offense: Supreme court". The Economic Times . 11 December 2013. Retrieved 11 December 2013.
  6. ↑ Buncombe, Andrew (17 December 2013). "India-US row over arrest of diplomat Devyani Khobragade in New York escalates" . The Independent. London. Archived from the original on 25 May 2022.
  7. ↑ "Punish US diplomats with same sex companions: Yashwant Sinha". Business Standard. 17 December 2013.
  8. ↑ "EnewspaperOfIndia.com". www.enewspaperofindia.com.
  9. ↑ "UN chief Ban Ki-moon calls for equality for lesbians, gays and bisexuals". The Times Of India. 12 December 2013. Archived from the original on 17 February 2014.
  10. ↑ India Today Online New Delhi, 12 December 2013 | UPDATED 19:05 IST
  11. ↑ "Suresh Kumar Kaushal vs. Naz Foundation: A Critical Analysis". www.lawctopus.com. 21 July 2014. Retrieved 1 February 2022.
  12. ↑ "Rahul-gandhi-wants-section-377-to-go-supports-gay-rights". India Today Online New Delhi. 12 December 2013.
  13. ↑ "Press Trust of India". Indian Express. No. 22 July. Press Trust of India. 2014. Retrieved 31 January 2015.
  14. ↑ Ratnam, Dhamini (14 January 2015). "BJP supports decriminalization of homosexuality: Shaina NC".
  15. ↑ "Centre moves apex court for review of Section 377 ruling". The Hindu . Chennai, India. 21 December 2013. Retrieved 21 December 2013.
  16. ↑ "Naz Foundation files review petition against SC order on Section 377". CNN IBN. 27 December 2013. Archived from the original on 30 December 2013. Retrieved 27 December 2013.
  17. ↑ "Supreme Court refuses overruling its Verdict on Section 377 and Homosexuality". IANS. Biharprabha News. Retrieved 28 January 2014.
  18. ↑ "SC Refuses To Review Sec 377 Order". Archived from the original on 10 March 2016. Retrieved 28 January 2014.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
  19. ↑ "Imran Khan tackles the homophobic Indian man in viral video". 27 December 2013.
  20. ↑ "Third world, third class: Social media reacts to SC 377 shocker". 11 December 2013.
  21. ↑ "Aamir Khan and John Abraham slam Supreme Court order against homosexuality, say it's a shame on Twitter".
  22. ↑ "Author Vikram Seth slams BJP for its "deafening silence" on gay sex verdict".
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.