Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Saturday, November 23, 2024

Case Analysis Of Decriminalization Of Section 377

Posted in: Criminal Law
Tue, Dec 20, 22, 23:09, 2 Years ago
star star star star star
5 out of 5 with 1 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 7634
On September 6, 2018, Indian Supreme Court of India quash section 377 of IPC, which had made any sexual relation with same gender a punishable offense with imprisonment up to ten years. Just human intercourse with animals, any sort of sexual activity with minors, and rape will be covered by this section.

On September 6, 2018, the Indian Supreme Court of India quash section 377 of the IPC, which had made any sexual relation with the same gender a punishable offense with imprisonment of up to ten years. Just human intercourse with animals, any sort of sexual activity with minors, and rape will be covered by this section. Since its initiation in 1860, this law has been applied and deciphered for prohibiting homosexual relations in India, without considering the consent of the parties as well as who are we to decide what is natural and what is not.

This law has left India's LGBTQ community without any rights on their sexual life over the years, and keeping them away from their constitutional rights to equality, right to privacy, and other civil rights. Repeal of Section 377, same-sex consensual sex becomes legal, paving the way for LGBT people to be recognized as normal people.

According to Justice Indu Malhotra, the sexual orientation of a person is personal to an individual and no discrimination on a rational choice violates the right to privacy of an induvial. This significant perception of the term's exhaustiveness guarantees that the LGBTQ people group in India is qualified for fundamental rights and other constitutional rights.
 
Now, article 15 gives the LGBT+ people admittance to public help and state-subsidized projects, like well-being and clinical consideration which they had previously been not qualified for. According to the Indian Journal of Medical Research gay people are at a higher risk of STDs, this is due to the stigma associated with same-sex behavior, which leads to single-encounter sexual relationships and other reasonable causes.

They are unable to take advantage of their medical benefits due to a lack of awareness and a fear of discrimination. The state should subsidize mindfulness crusades and guarantee that no LGBTQ individuals are prevented from clinical consideration on the premise of getting their sexual direction.
 
"I'm understanding this verdict, in addition to if it goes in my favor, I will apply for same-sex marriage rights,"[1] says Madhuri Sarode, a transsexual lady from Mumbai who wedded Jay Rajnath Sharma yet never had the marriage registered. The cancelation of Section 377 gives desire to numerous transsexual couples who need to wed lawfully and live-in pride. Moreover, it currently permits the state to pass an enactment to regulate transsexual couples to embrace kids.

They would now be able to commend their affection and start a family unafraid of being arraigned, beaten, reported, or tormented by the police in view of their choices. They can likewise go to court if they accept their key privileges have been abused or to affirm any protected right that presently can't seem to be liberated from the shackles of sexual direction.
 
It is the state's responsibility to achieve primary changes in the framework and society to liberate the LGBTQ people group from mistreatment, to give instructive and business openings so they are not compelled to ask, and to run after sanctioning enemy of biased enactment against acts that propagate social disparities.
 
The SC decision was generally invited and commended by the informed in metropolitan regions, especially the adolescent, as confirmed by a large number of tweets, hashtags, and posts supporting the LGBTQ people group via online media, just as in an established press.

However, Muslim clerics and members of the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board did not support Supreme Court's historic ruling on section 377, calling homosexuality "against religion and humanity." Although we support LGBT rights, do we truly see them as equal? What number of us sympathize with them as people rather than sympathize with them because they are 'different'?

Are parents willing to accept their children's sexual orientation? Will there at any point be any point at which we don't have a solitary uncertainty or feel totally calm having a gay individual in our group of friends? We need to ask ourselves these questions to ourselves. With regards to a singular's very own decisions and unavoidable right to life and freedom, dread, biases, and the inclination to disparage each conduct of a person into a particular class of "good," "awful," "moral," "improper," and "acknowledged" or "unaccepted" should be disregarded.

The LGBTQ people group battles for acknowledgment in the public arena as people first, where they can reside with reputation and uniqueness, similarly as the nation's purported "straight" greater part residents do; a long and continuous course of progress is required.
 
Close by, it is the law, and milestone choices, for example, the Supreme Court of India's Right to Privacy and Decriminalization of Section 377, that consistently go about as a guardian angel; that can bring us one bit nearer to a comprehensive society in the strict sense, where a gay's psyche is liberated from dread and his head is held high with satisfaction however it actually doesn't resolve every one of the issues looked by LGBTQ+ people group. The section 377 is an absolute backward law and not relevant in today’s time where everyone has right to live their life whoever they want and without harming anyone else legal right.  

End-Notes:

  1. Decriminalization of Section 377: A step towards an Inclusive Society, Statecraft (Sept. 11, 2018), www.statecraft.co.in/article/decriminalization-of-section-377-a-step-towards-an-inclusive-society.

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Roshni Singh
Member since Dec 20, 2022
Location: Noida, Uttar Pradesh
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top