Test 2

Please select your preferred language.

請選擇你慣用的語言。

请选择你惯用的语言。

English
中文简体
台灣繁體
香港繁體

Login

Remember Me

New to Fridae?

Fridae Mobile

Advertisement
Highlights

More About Us

1 Jul 2016

Challenge to India’s anti-gay law in India not accepted by supreme court

In a major setback to the country’s LGBT community, the court has refused a challenge that argued section 377 of the penal code undermines human rights

A number of well-known LGBT Indians have lost a legal petition to challenge section 377 of India’s penal code.

Arvind Dattar, a lawyer for one of the petitioners, said “the supreme court refused to hear the matter and asked the petitioners to approach the chief justice of India.”

Section 377 of India’s penal code prohibits “carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal.” It was re-introduced by the supreme court in 2013 after a four year decriminalisation of homosexuality.

The petitioners argued it undermined their fundamental rights by failing to protect their sexual preferences.

 

A separate case to remove the ban is already being heard by India’s chief justice. Previously India’s supreme court has argued that only parliament has the power to change section 377.

Reader's Comments

1. 2016-07-02 02:01  
"Major setback" and "refused a challenge" seems very misleading. I found an article by The Hindu

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/sc-refers-plea-seeking-decriminalisation-of-gay-sex-to-cji/article8787750.ece?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication

which says:

"Justice Bobde observed that the fresh petition by the celebrities be referred to Chief Justice Thakur for a decision on whether it should be tagged along with the curative petitions and further referred to a Constitution Bench."

So it is not rejected: this fresh petition by celebrities may just be joined to the 8 previous curative petitions which have been jointly accepted by the SC on Feb. 2. Which looks completely reasonable.
2. 2016-07-02 15:04  
 "against the order of nature" you'd have to think homosexuality was against nature for it to apply.

And if you want the law changing its a parliament matter. Or do you want unelected people making the law?

Education is the key, not this sort of stunt combined with lazy journalism.

Please log in to use this feature.

Select News Edition

Featured Profiles

Now ALL members can view unlimited profiles!

Languages

View this page in a different language:

Like Us on Facebook

Partners

 ILGA Asia - Fridae partner for LGBT rights in Asia IGLHRC - Fridae Partner for LGBT rights in Asia

Advertisement