Homosexuality is criminal offence, Supreme Court rules [India]

[alp227]

Source: The Times of India (Mumbai)

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside the decision of the Delhi high court, which had in 2009 decriminalised sexual relation between persons belonging to same sex.

The apex court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 377 of Indian Penal Code that makes anal sex a punishable offence.

LGBT activists, whose sexual relationships had been legalised by the Delhi HC, broke down inside the court room.

Parliament is authorised to remove Section 377, but as long as this provision is there, the court can not legalise this kind of sexual relationship, the SC bench observed.

Read more: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Homosexuality-is-criminal-offence-Supreme-Court-rules/articleshow/27208873.cms

---

More coverage: The Hindu (Chennai), Hindustan Times (New Delhi), BBC, AP, Washington Post, India Today, Reuters

Hmm. So should the USA deport Ken Cuccinelli to India?

[Behind the Aegis]

1. And another major country takes a step backwards!

[Vashta Nerada]

2. Disgusting.

[SoapBox]

3. Time to outsource the outsourcing that is here.

The stupid keeps spreading.

[JI7]

4. the Indian Supreme Court only has 2 Judges ?

[cosmicone]

10. The Indian supreme court works like federal appellate courts

in the US.

A smaller bench issues a ruling first and it can be appealed to the entire bench. Unlike the US, the initial decisions are not final. This will be reversed by the full bench.

[Recursion]

12. It has 31

They set up impromptu benches of 2, 3, or 5 judges for each case based on the scope of the legal question involved.

[Drunken Irishman]

6. Amazing how some countries are moving forward on equality and others regressing.

[JI7]

7. so if there was some old law which made it ok to have slaves

they think it should remain law unless parliament voted to remove it ?

[SoapBox]

9. Ohoooooo....

Such a good point.

[FrodosPet]

20. Unfortunately, if it were unconstitutional to unilaterally overturn it...

...then yes, sadly, it looks like that is what they would legally have to do.

India's constitution and legal code is not the same as the United States.

[Treant]

8. Well, there's another country

that gets downgraded to "hellhole" and knocked off my list of places I'll ever set foot. Or buy products from.

[Recursion]

11. Damn it. India is moving to the right, very fast.

Homosexuality is still taboo enough that it's not an open platform position, but it's been a subtext of BJP rants for a while now. And they look poised to win in next year's elections, unfortunately.

[smitra]

13. The same court has recently ruled on 'live-in relationships'

Last edited Wed Dec 11, 2013, 09:40 AM - Edit history (1)

See here: http://ibnlive.in.com/news/livein-relationship-neither-a-crime-nor-a-sin-supreme-court/436693-3.html

The law referred to in this latest ruling (Section 377) dates from 1860 - that is, it was originally passed by the British government. The court's recent ruling on live-in relationships is obviously in response to the manner in which civil society is evolving in the country. Based on the principle of the supremacy of Parliament (the legislature, whose job it is to make the law), the court in this case offers guidelines to Parliament -- but it is Parliament who has to act on it.

The same has to occur with Section 377 as well. If anyone is actually prosecuted on the basis of this law, civil society has to react - similar to the reactions in response to the horrific gang rape in New Delhi last year, which resulted in changes in a number of laws. The courts will then recognize that, and Parliament will have to act.

[closeupready]

14. 'The world's largest democracy' - lol.

"NOT."

[smitra]

15. So states like Texas that outlaw gay marriage are not democracies? Amazing non sequitur! n/t

[closeupready]

16. You responded, because you got what I meant.

Not because I made no sense.

But nice try!

[smitra]

17. No, I did NOT get what you meant. Please explain.

I view your comment as racist. Calling a non-white culture a democracy causes pain to a lot of people, even on this supposedly liberal board.

Please refrain from using those random icons in replies to my posts, and meaningless phrases like "Nice try". If you cannot have a substantive discussion, do not bother to respond.

[closeupready]

19. Uh-huh. You didn't get my point, but whatever it is, it's racist.

Unlike me, your point is crystal clear.

[smitra]

22. Yes, you got that right.

I stand by my comment that your comment IS racist. To substantiate: You did not refute my comparison with Texas, and you did NOT bring forth any substantive points. You continue to express scorn and derision, towards a country you PROBABLY have little knowledge of, and whose governmental systems (including the legal and legislative systems) you are probably unfamiliar with. You express no desire to learn more, to understand the situation more deeply, and see how the 1.2 billion people of India can move forward in this regard.

All you have to offer is an over-use of smileys and similar icons.

Conclusion: You are only interested in denigrating a different country/system, and not having a discussion. This indicates prejudice - however much you may deny it.

India IS the world's largest democracy - 1.2 billion people, who get to choose their governments regularly. That is a fact, however much it pains people like you.

End of discussion.

[geek tragedy]

18. Guess they were jealous of the attention Russia is getting. nt

[fujiyama]

21. Big step back

What a pathetic body. India's judges are as bad as its horrible, worthless politicians.

Between this and its inability to keep women safe, it's clear the country has a very long way to go before it can be considered a "developed" nation. It's frustrating that a country with so many brilliant people has so many that think like small-minded idiots. It's especially irritating hear them go on about "natural" sexual acts. It's clear they're unaware that homosexuality isn't all that rare in the animal kingdom.

I don't even understand why India still has bizarre Victorian era laws on the books (of its colonizers that too!). The interesting thing is that Hinduism itself doesn't have much to say about homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many ancient temples also have some incredible erotic art. Yet, it's a really sexually repressed society... It's like India can't quite shake its colonial past or at least their values.

[smitra]

23. I agree that it is a step backwards...

But look at my post # 13, regarding a judgment by the same court on live-in relationships. I disagree that the judges are as bad as the politicians... much good has happened in India thru judicial activism, especially since the 1980s. The constitution of India says that Parliament is supreme, and must make the laws (and repeal the bad colonial era laws). The judges, in their judgment on the rights of people in live-in relationships, are stating that Parliament must act to encode these rights into law. In this judgment, they are also saying that it is Parliament that must repeal that law from the 1860s.

I agree that if India could get its elected officials to act then it would be a different story.

[Douglas Carpenter]

24. I'm guessing that in Russia and India and elsewhere - the issue of homosexuality has overlapped with

nationalism and a sense of independence. It is unfortunate that in many socially conservative and less economically developed societies - acceptance of homosexuality has come to be viewed in large elements of popular culture as acceptance of western hegemony along with western values and decadence. Thus nationalist elements of societies that may have traditionally had a "don't ask - don't tell" approach start viewing acceptance of homosexuality as something western dominance is imposing on them. Once this genie of nationalism is out of the bottle on this issue - the whole issue takes on an entirely different stigma.

[muriel_volestrangler]

25. India government mulls legalising gay sex

The Indian government is considering decriminalising homosexuality, a day after the country's top court upheld a law which criminalised gay sex.

Law Minister Kapil Sibal said "all options were being considered to restore a 2009 Delhi High Court order" which had decriminalised gay sex.

Earlier, Finance Minister P Chidambaram said the ruling had taken India "back to 1860".
...
"Criminalising private, consensual same-sex sexual conduct violates the rights to privacy and to non-discrimination enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which India has ratified," UN human rights chief Navi Pillay said in a statement issued in Geneva on Thursday.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-25344900