Introduction
The journey towards LGBTQ+ rights in India features a complex mix of legal struggles, societal resistance, and gradual acceptance. Over the past decade, activists and supporters have made significant strides, yet the LGBTQ+ community still faces systemic discrimination, legal uncertainties, and social ostracism. This article investigates the evolution of LGBTQ+ rights in India, highlighting landmark legal rulings, key case studies, and the ongoing challenges that the community confronts.
Historical Context: Colonial Legacy and Section 377
The British colonial rule significantly influenced the legal framework governing homosexuality in India. In 1861, lawmakers introduced Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), criminalising “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” and effectively prohibiting same-sex relationships. This law, rooted in Victorian morality, remained in place for over 150 years, leading to widespread persecution of LGBTQ+ individuals.
Early Resistance and the AIDS Crisis
The 1980s and 1990s marked the rise of HIV/AIDS activism, which inadvertently brought LGBTQ+ issues into the public arena. Organisations such as the Naz Foundation worked diligently with men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender individuals, illustrating how Section 377 hampered public health initiatives by pushing these marginalised communities further into the shadows.
Landmark Case: Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (2009)
The initial significant legal challenge to Section 377 occurred in 2001 when the Naz Foundation, a non-governmental organisation focused on HIV/AIDS prevention, lodged a petition contending that the law infringed upon fundamental rights as stated in Articles 14 (equality), 15 (non-discrimination), 19 (freedom of expression), and 21 (right to life and privacy).
Delhi High Court’s Progressive Judgment (2009)
In a pivotal ruling, the Delhi High Court decriminalised consensual same-sex relations among adults. The bench, composed of Chief Justice Ajit Prakash Shah and Justice S. Muralidhar, asserted that Section 377 was discriminatory and violated constitutional rights. Sexual orientation is an intrinsic aspect of identity and cannot be subjected to criminalisation. The law perpetuated stigma, rendering LGBTQ+ individuals susceptible to harassment. This judgment was celebrated as a monumental victory, yet it faced immediate backlash from conservative and religious groups.
Setback: Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation (2013)
In 2013, the Supreme Court of India reversed the Delhi High Court’s decision, reinstating Section 377. The bench, led by Justice G.S. Singhvi, controversially opined that only a “minuscule fraction” of the population was affected. Such matters should be decided by the legislature rather than the judiciary. This ruling delivered a significant blow to LGBTQ+ rights, inciting widespread protests and a resurgence in activism.
The Road to Decriminalisation: Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018)
The LGBTQ+ community and its allies refused to relent. A fresh petition was filed by dancer Navtej Singh Johar, along with notable figures such as journalist Sunil Mehra, chef Ritu Dalmia, and hotelier Aman Nath, challenging Section 377.
Supreme Court’s Unanimous Verdict (2018)
On 6th September 2018, a five-judge constitutional bench (including CJI Dipak Misra, Justices R.F. Nariman, A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud, and Indu Malhotra) delivered a historic judgement: Section 377 was partially struck down, decriminalising consensual same-sex relations. Sexual orientation is recognised as a fundamental right under Article 21 (right to privacy and dignity). Discrimination based on sexuality infringes upon Articles 14 and 15. The court expressed regret for past injustices, acknowledging the trauma inflicted upon LGBTQ+ individuals.
Key Excerpts from the Judgement:
Justice Chandrachud remarked: “The right to love and be loved is fundamental to human existence.” Justice Indu Malhotra stated: “History owes an apology to LGBTQ+ individuals for centuries of discrimination.”
While this ruling marked a watershed moment, it did not confer full equality—issues such as same-sex marriage, adoption, and comprehensive anti-discrimination laws remained inadequately addressed.
Post-2018 Developments: Progress and Ongoing Struggles
- Transgender Rights: The Transgender Persons Act, 2019 In 2014, the Supreme Court, in NALSA v. Union of India, recognised transgender individuals as a “third gender” and affirmed their constitutional rights. However, the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 faced criticism for: mandating medical certification for gender identity (contrary to the principle of self-identification), a lack of robust anti-discrimination measures, and the absence of reservations in education and employment, as recommended by NALSA.
- Workplace Discrimination and Corporate Inclusion. Some companies (such as TCS, Infosys, and Godrej) have adopted LGBTQ+ inclusive policies. Nevertheless, India still lacks a comprehensive anti-discrimination law, and many queer individuals encounter hiring biases, workplace harassment, and coerced resignations.
- The Same-Sex Marriage Debate: Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty v. Union of India (2023) In 2023, the Supreme Court considered petitions advocating for the legal recognition of same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act (SMA). LGBTQ+ couples argued that the refusal to grant marriage rights infringed upon Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
Verdict (October 2023): The Supreme Court declined to legalise same-sex marriage, asserting that the matter should be determined by Parliament. However, it instructed the government to establish a committee to investigate rights for same-sex couples, such as joint bank accounts and inheritance rights. Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul expressed dissenting opinions, advocating for civil unions.
Case Studies: Personal Struggles and Legal Challenges
- The Battle for Adoption Rights:
– Case: Arun Kumar & Sreeja v. Union of India.
A gay couple filed a petition after being denied the right to adopt jointly. Current laws permit single LGBTQ+ individuals to adopt, yet restrict same-sex couples. This case remains unresolved, underscoring the legal gaps in parental rights for queer families.
- Police Brutality and Section 377 (Pre-2018)
– Case: Harassment of AIIMS Student (2016)
A gay student at AIIMS was blackmailed and reported to the police under Section 377. Activists stepped in, but the incident highlighted the misuse of the law for extortion.
- Transgender Rights in Practice
– Case: Laxmi Narayan Tripathi
A prominent transgender activist who campaigned for legal recognition. Despite the NALSA judgement, many trans individuals continue to experience police abuse, denial of healthcare, and barriers to employment.
Societal Challenges: Beyond Legal Recognition
- Family Rejection and Forced Marriages
Many LGBTQ+ individuals face pressure to enter into heterosexual marriages. Although conversion therapy has been banned in several states, it remains a widespread issue.
- Violence and Hate Crimes
Transgender individuals encounter disproportionately high rates of physical and sexual violence, while incidents of corrective rape against lesbian and bisexual women continue to be reported.
- Mental Health Crisis
Due to societal stigma, many LGBTQ+ individuals experience depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts, exacerbated by a lack of queer-affirmative mental health services.
Conclusion
The LGBTQ+ rights movement in India has made significant strides, from the decriminalisation of homosexuality to increasing societal acceptance. However, the road ahead is still long. Legal recognition of same-sex marriage, adoption rights, and anti-discrimination protections a crucial ongoing battle.
The judiciary has played an essential role, yet it is now imperative for Parliament to act to ensure full equality. Concurrently, civil society, media, and businesses must persist in their advocacy for inclusivity. The struggle for LGBTQ+ rights in India exemplifies resilience, and with continued effort, a genuinely equitable future is attainable.
Also Read:
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India
