The Indian Supreme Court’s judgment in Navtej Singh Johar, delivered in September 2018, decriminalizing same-sex relations in India, generated a storm of discussion and debate, in both India and in the world beyond. Apart from its clear and sharp verdict that held that the Indian Constitution protected the rights of the LGBTQ+ community, the decision was also noteworthy because it reversed the Court’s own prior judgment, delivered a mere five years before (in 2013), that had upheld the constitutional validity of the law that penalized same-sex relations.
In this case comment, we set out the chronology of judicial decisions that led to the final judgment in Navtej Singh Johar: the judgment of the High Court of Delhi in 2009, which first decriminalized same-sex relations, the 2013 judgment of the Indian Supreme Court that reversed it, and the various judicial proceedings that continued to rumble on in the Court—an additional round known as the ‘curative hearing’, and separate litigation on the constitutional status of the right to privacy. Within this context, the paper then discusses the multiple opinions that were delivered by the Bench in Navtej Singh Johar, and examines the reasons on the basis of which the Court held that Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code—insofar as it criminalized same-sex relations between consenting adults—violated the fundamental rights to equality, nondiscrimination, freedom of expression, and life and personal liberty, guaranteed by the Constitution of India. The article will conclude by setting out some possibilities for the way forward, in light of the judgment.
Protecting the rights of LGBTIQ people around the world: Beyond marriage equality and the decriminalisation of homosexuality