Background
This landmark case challenged the constitutional validity of Section 377 IPC, which criminalised “carnal intercourse against the order of nature.” The provision was widely used to criminalise consensual same-sex relations between adults, leading to discrimination and stigma against the LGBTQ+ community.
Constitutional Issues
The petition raised questions on whether Section 377 violated:
- Article 14: Equality before law
- Article 15: Non-discrimination (including on grounds of sex)
- Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of expression
- Article 21: Right to life, dignity, and privacy
Judgment
In a unanimous verdict, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court partially struck down Section 377.
Key Holdings
Decriminalisation of Consensual Same-Sex Relations
- Consensual sexual acts between adults in private were declared constitutional and lawful.
Section 377 Partially Invalidated
- The provision remains valid only for:
- Non-consensual acts
- Acts involving minors
- Bestiality
Recognition of Sexual Orientation
- Sexual orientation was recognised as an intrinsic and immutable aspect of identity.
Key Constitutional Principles
Right to Dignity
The Court held that criminalising same-sex relations violates the dignity of individuals.
Right to Privacy
Building on the Puttaswamy judgment, it affirmed that intimate personal choices fall within the right to privacy.
Equality and Non-Discrimination
- Section 377 was held to be arbitrary and discriminatory
- The Court interpreted “sex” under Article 15 to include sexual orientation
Transformative Constitutionalism
The judgment emphasised that the Constitution is a living document that must evolve to protect minority rights.
Doctrinal Contributions
- Introduced and strengthened the idea of constitutional morality over social morality
- Affirmed that majoritarian views cannot override fundamental rights
- Recognised the concept of individual autonomy in matters of identity and intimacy
Significance
- Historic step in recognising LGBTQ+ rights in India
- Shifted the legal framework from criminalisation to constitutional protection
- Strengthened jurisprudence on privacy, dignity, and equality
Limitations and Continuing Issues
- Did not address issues like:
- Same-sex marriage
- Adoption rights
- Anti-discrimination laws in employment and housing
Conclusion
The Navtej Singh Johar judgment is a transformative milestone in Indian constitutional law. It not only decriminalised consensual same-sex relations but also affirmed the values of dignity, equality, and individual freedom, marking a decisive move towards a more inclusive and rights-based legal order.
