 | « Back to article | Print this article |
Some high-profile celebrities, who claim to be part of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender community, have approached the Supreme Court seeking quashing of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code which criminalises homosexuality in the country
The celebrities, including chef Ritu Dalmia, hotelier Aman Nath and dancer N S Johar, have sought protection of their sexual rights on the ground that it is an integral part of the fundamental right to life.
The plea is likely to come up for consideration on June 29 when the court reopens after summer break.
The gay celebrities, in their plea, said their lives have been ‘inexorably constricted and their rights infringed’ by the penal provision.
‘Despite their achievements and contributions to India in various fields, they are being denied the right to sexuality, the most basic and inherent of fundamental rights. Section 377 renders them criminals in their own country,’ the plea said.
Earlier, a Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur had agreed to hear in an open court the curative plea of non-governmental organisation Naz Foundation and some gay rights activists.
On February 2, the court referred the curative plea to a five-judge Constitution Bench for re-examination of the two-year-old verdict by which a colonial law, criminalizing consensual sexual acts between the same sexes under Section 377 of IPC, was restored.
The curative plea was filed against the dismissal of their petition seeking a review of the 2013 judgement of the apex court upholding the validity of Section 377 (unnatural sexual offences) of the IPC.
Now, the gay celebrities have filed a fresh writ petition to quash the penal provision.
Naz Foundation had filed a petition in December 2001 in the Delhi high court, which had on July 2, 2009, decriminalised Section 377. After refusing twice to entertain pleas against Section 377, the SC had on February 2 referred the issue to a five-judge bench.
The apex court had earlier dismissed a batch of review petitions filed by the Centre and gay rights activists against its December 2013 verdict declaring gay sex an offence punishable up to life imprisonment.
The court had said it did not see any reason to interfere with the December 11, 2013 verdict. It had also rejected the plea for oral hearing on the review petitions which are normally decided by judges in chamber without giving an opportunity to parties to present their views.
It had revived the penal provision making gay sex an offence punishable with life imprisonment.
While setting aside the July 2, 2009 verdict of Delhi high court, the apex court had held that Section 377 of IPC does not suffer from the vice of unconstitutionality and that the declaration made by the high court was legally unsustainable.
Image used for representational purpose only.