Section 377: final hearing on April 19

February 08, 2011 02:43 am | Updated November 17, 2021 06:57 am IST - New Delhi

The Supreme Court on Monday posted for final hearing on April 19 a batch of petitions challenging a Delhi High Court judgment declaring Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code unconstitutional and decriminalising unnatural sex among consenting adults.

A Bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and A.K. Ganguly granted eight weeks' time to the Centre (which has not spelt out its stand on the issue so far) and other parties, including interveners, to complete the pleadings and file written submissions and posted the matter for hearing on April 19.

The petitioners, Suresh Kumar Koshal, an astrologer, and Dr. Mukesh Kumar Koshal, submitted in their Special Leave Petitions that they were deeply hurt by the judgment “inasmuch as it seriously affects them and fellow countrymen in all spheres of their lives, personal as well as social.” A rampant increase in homosexual movement after the impugned order could not be ruled out.

The judgments in various countries that permitted homosexuality, which was relied upon by the High Court, were rendered in a different set of social, economic, constitutional and cultural background.

“Application of those principles ipso facto, without any reference to the background and circumstances leading thereto, is itself a sufficient ground for striking down the impugned judgment.”

They said the judgment would result in spread of HIV virus “as it has been amply proven that the infection was contracted through such sexual acts. We have to look at our own scriptures to seek guidance and they are against such behaviour in our society. If such abnormality is permitted, then tomorrow people might seek permission for having sex with animals.”

The petitioners said: “The High Court completely lost sight of the fact that the Indian society still remains, by and large, a conservative and primitive society and shining nature of Indian societies found in Metros [which is less than 6 to 7 per cent] cannot represent the whole of India.”

The Bench declined the request to implead the Defence Ministry as a necessary party.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.