Section 377 - Everyone is equal in society

Section 377-The History from1861 to 2018: A timeline of Section 377


The History of Section 377 from 1861 to 2018: A timeline of Section 377

In response to the petitions, a five-judge Constitutional bench led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra began hearing them on July 10th 2018.

The Supreme Court on Monday rejected Centre’s request to adjourn the hearing on this Section-Three-Seven-Seven of the Indian legal code that criminalises sex activity associate degreed makes gay sex an offence. Today, a five-judge Constitutional bench, junction rectifier by jurist of Asian nation Dipak Misra began hearing the petitions difficult it.


The Indian Penal Code
Unnatural offences.—Whoever voluntarily has carnal inter­course against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with 1[imprisonment for life], or with impris­onment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation.—Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section

Section 377 deals with “unnatural offences,” and holds “whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, girl or animal shall be censured with imprisonment for keeps, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which can reach 10 years, and shall even be at risk of fine.” because the SC hears the petition, here’s a timeline of the case and therefore the landmark judgments:

1861: Introduction of Section 377

Section 377 in The Indian Penal Code
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected Centre’s request to adjourn the hearing on Section-Three hundred seventy seven of the Indian Penal Code that criminalizes homosexuality and makes gay sex an offence. Today, a five-judge Constitutional bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak M. began hearing the petitions challenging it.

Section 377 was introduced by British Asian nation, modelled on the perversion Act of 1533. This section of the perversion Act was written by Thomas Thomas Babington Macaulay in 1838 and was brought into impact in 1860. It outlined ‘buggery’ as associate degree unnatural sexual act against the need of God and man, thus, criminalising anal penetration, sexual practice and sex activity, during a broader sense.

2001: Naz Foundation files petition against Section 377 in city court

Over the years, Section 377 had sparked varied controversies with activists difficult it in varied ways in which. In 2001, Naz Foundation filed a petition difficult the constitutionality of Section 377 within the city court. They filed a suit to permit homosexual relations between willing adults.

2003: city HC dismisses Naz Foundation plea

The city court pink-slipped the Naz Foundation petition, spoken language the body had no standing within the matter. The Naz Foundation appealed the dismissal to the Supreme Court in 2006, that schooled the city court to rethink the case.


2009: city HC decriminalises sex activity

In a landmark call, the city court decriminalised sex activity among willing adults, holding it in violation of Article fourteen, fifteen and twenty one of the Constitution of Asian nation.


2012: Supreme Court overturns the HC order

After HC’s judgment, varied appeals were created to the Supreme Court, difficult the High Court’s authority to vary a law. In Gregorian calendar month 2012, the Supreme Court upset the HC’s call, once finding it “legally unsustainable.” A two-judge bench, comprising Justice G S Singhvi and Justice S J Mukhopadhaya determined that the HC had unnoticed the actual fact that a “minuscule fraction of the country’s population constitutes LGBT,” which in over {150|one hundred fifty|a hundred associate degreed fifty} years but two hundred individuals were prosecuted for committing an offence below the section.


The Supreme Court then suggested that the Parliament address the matter as a result of solely they’d the facility to amend the prevailing laws.


2015: Shashi Tharoor’s non-public Member Bill

After the Narendra Modi-led government was sworn-in in 2014, it same it might take a call relating to Section 377 solely once the SC judgment. during a written reply to Lok Sabha, Minister of State (Home) Kiren Rijiju had same, “The matter is sub-judiced before the Supreme Court. a call relating to Section 377 of IPC will be taken solely once declaration of judgment by the Supreme Court.”


A year later, once Shashi Tharoor introduced a personal member’s Bill to permit sex activity, the Lok Sabha voted against it.

2016: 5 petitioners move SC over Section 377

Five petitions were filed by S Johar, journalist Sunil Mehra, cook Ritu Dalmia, hotel manager Aman Nath and executive director Ayesha Kapur. The petition, filed by well-known LGBTQ activists, claimed their “rights to physiological property, sexual autonomy, selection of sexual partner, life, privacy, dignity, and equality, along side the opposite basic rights bonded below Part-III of Constitution, ar desecrated by Section 377.”


2018: SC begins hearing on Section 377

A five-judge Constitutional bench, junction rectifier by jurist of Asian nation Dipak Misra and comprising Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra, begins hearing petitions difficult Section 377.



But Irony is always there,

Recently, It was in trending news that

The day, a part of Section talking about was repealed, I, like many different queer and trans folks round the country, hoped for and expected a way forward for equal citizenship – a future during which expression, personal selectionpersonal areas and differential identities would be revered. Four years once the repeal of a part of mentioned Section, and my memory of the day is ironically suffering from my queer friends facing repercussions of being outed while not consent whereas celebrating at the Supreme Court.

While the judgment control enough weight to alter queer and trans lives within the country – since its delivery – the evolution of rights and legal recourse for queer and trans folks remains scrawny. The Gregorian calendar month half-dozen judgment remains the only crutch in our legal repository, with abundant else left unaddressed amid a growing trend of violence against LGBTQI folks.








Also read

Maneka Gandhi V/S Union of India 1978 (Fundamental Right -The absolute power of dignity of individual)

Important sections of CPC 1908, Quick revision, Let’s crack the Exam

Important sections of IPC 1860- Quick revision, Let’s Crack Exam

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *