377 Debate

Upholding Section 377, Supreme Court nullified the decision of the Delhi High Court "it is ultra vires". To a blow to LGBST, SC ignored the miniscule gays by considering it is against the order of nature. While our constitution enshrines Right to Equality as a fundamental right and reinstates no person can be discriminated on the basis of religion, race, caste and sex, the ruling hints that rights are not for the iota(s) but for the majority. The violent rapes and  sexual assaults become a minor offense, when the act of homosexuality invites  punishment up to life imprisonment. And at last who will consider the grievances of poor gays, which is not human induced but hormone induced.

We need to preserve and protect our values, culture and heritage without blindly imitating the West. The question 'tomorrow when a new minority comes with a different kind of sexual orientation......?'  judiciary as well as policy makers now without any clues. And some say 'it is curable'.
Is it a draconian act (homosexuality) or a barbarian verdict in the civilized society?    

Though the option of curative petition or legislation by the Parliament is still left, it will be a far dream for the gays amidst communal-religious sentiments prevails.

Sadasiv writes
Let's get one thing straight, everybody is not.

For a constantly activist Supreme Court to suddenly restrain itself and ask Parliament to decide on matters seems against its recent judicial behaviour. 

For the record Sec. 377 of IPC states any sexual activities "against the order of nature" is deemed illegal. So it is not just restricted to intercourse among homosexuals but also among straight people. It's just that homosexuals are a prime target to be harassed by this section of the IPC (So far only a handful have been convicted under it and that too when the act was done without consent). 

The Delhi High Court merely "read down" Section 377 saying that it is not illegal if the sexual acts are done with consent - it did not strike it down as popularly thought. For the SC to undo even this seemingly logical change in interpretation, along with referring to the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transsexual) community as a microscopic minority, is what gives this judgement a highly intolerant and prejudiced tone.\

 

Paul V Mathew writes

Whatever may the judgement, the act of referring LGBST Community as a microscopic minority is totally disappointing. Well said Sadasiv. But if it is not void, it will be legal -then, as sexual acts without consent is an offense, how we can infer that "DHC did not strike it down as popularly thought?

Sadasiv clarifies

Well, there are many acts that seem "against the order of nature" like the use of birth control. Section 377 talks of "unnatural offences" related to intercourse. So it can technically include anything other than usual sexual intercourse between straight couples. Essentially, it declares even consensual intercourse as illegal, which is what the Delhi High Court read down.

Usually, you would add the charges of Sec. 377 along with Sec. 376 which pertains to rape when anything unnatural happens without consent. Like it could have been used due the gruesome use of a rod as done during the Delhi Rape case.