Navtej Singh Johar and others v. Union of India (2018) is a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India that decriminalized consensual homosexual acts between adults, effectively reading down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This judgment is celebrated for affirming the rights and dignity of LGBTQ+ individuals in India. Here’s a brief overview of this important case:
Background:
Section 377 of the IPC, introduced during the British colonial era, criminalized “carnal intercourse against the order of nature,” which was interpreted to include consensual homosexual acts. The provision carried a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The petitioners, including dancer Navtej Singh Johar, challenged the constitutionality of Section 377, arguing that it violated fundamental rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.
Key Legal Issues:
- Right to Equality and Non-Discrimination: Whether Section 377 violated the fundamental rights to equality (Article 14) and non-discrimination (Article 15) by criminalizing consensual homosexual acts.
- Right to Life and Personal Liberty: Whether Section 377 infringed upon the right to life and personal liberty (Article 21), including the right to privacy and dignity.
- Freedom of Expression: Whether the law restricted the freedom of expression (Article 19) by prohibiting individuals from expressing their sexual orientation.
Court’s Decision:
The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision by a five-judge bench, held that Section 377, to the extent it criminalized consensual sexual conduct between adults, was unconstitutional. Key points of the decision include:
- Violation of Fundamental Rights: The Court held that Section 377 violated Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution. It was deemed discriminatory and an infringement on the rights to equality, non-discrimination, life, liberty, and dignity.
- Right to Privacy: Citing the Puttaswamy judgment, the Court emphasized that the right to privacy includes the right to make personal choices regarding intimate conduct. Consensual sexual relations between adults are part of the right to privacy.
- Dignity and Autonomy: The judgment underscored the importance of individual dignity and autonomy, stating that Section 377 was an affront to the dignity of LGBTQ+ individuals and denied them the right to live with dignity.
- Impact on Freedom of Expression: The Court recognized that Section 377 restricted the freedom of expression by forcing individuals to conceal their sexual orientation, thus violating Article 19.
- Decriminalization and Affirmation: The Court decriminalized consensual homosexual acts between adults, affirming the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals. It highlighted that the law should not interfere in matters of private consensual conduct between adults.
Significance:
- Affirmation of LGBTQ+ Rights: The judgment is a landmark victory for LGBTQ+ rights in India, affirming their right to equality, dignity, and freedom from discrimination.
- Strengthening of Privacy Rights: The decision reinforced the right to privacy as a fundamental right, extending its protection to include consensual sexual relations between adults.
- Promotion of Equality: The judgment marked a significant step towards achieving greater equality and inclusiveness in Indian society, challenging deep-seated prejudices and stigmas against LGBTQ+ individuals.
Legacy:
- The Navtej Singh Johar judgment has had a transformative impact on Indian jurisprudence, setting a precedent for the protection of LGBTQ+ rights and promoting broader discussions on equality and human rights.
- The decision has been celebrated globally as a milestone in the fight for LGBTQ+ rights and has influenced similar legal battles in other countries.
- It remains a critical reference point for ongoing efforts to ensure legal and social recognition and protection for LGBTQ+ individuals in India.