SC Judgements - A Comparison
Recently (April, 2014) the Supreme Court gave a judgement declaring that 'transgender community' as a 'third gender' along with male and female.
The Supreme Court also directed the centre and the states to take steps to treat them as socially and educationally backward classes and extend reservation for them in educational institutions and in public employments. The Supreme Court also observed that transgenders are also citizens of India and they should be given equal opportunities to grow and attain their potential.
This judgement is considered as a progressive one and it will help in mainstreaming of hitherto socially excluded transgenders. Historically, they were never socially exclude from the society in India, but it was the British who with their colonial mindset made legislations which regarded transgenders as criminals and this was the reason for their alienation from the mainstream. By this judgement Supreme Court has upheld the rights of transgenders and also Supreme Court has the right precedence in doing so. Remember, the Supreme Court has given a progressive judgement in this case.
But the same Supreme Court in last month (March, 2014) on an issue related to LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) community gave a judgement which is contradictory to the principle of the first judgement above. The Supreme Court in LGBT issue ordered that the Section 377 of IPC which criminalises unnatural sex(sex among LGBT) is constitutional and those practising unnatural sex are liable for punishment under the law. But earlier the Delhi High Court ordered that the Section 377 of IPC is unconstitutional and void as it violates Articles 14,15 and 21 of the constitution. But the Supreme Court reversed this order of Delhi High Court and recriminalised sex among LGBT i.e, the Supreme Court said that Section 377 of IPC is valid. This judgement is a regressive judgement and it has the effect of social exclusion of LGBT community.
Thus the Supreme Court in the first judgement talks about rights of transgenders and gives a progressive judgement and in the second case the same Supreme Court gives a contradictory judgement which is regressive in nature.
Recently the Supreme Court has accepted the Curative Petition regarding the Section 377 of IPC and has agreed to hear it in the open court. Let us hope that the Supreme Court considers the right of LGBT community to choose their partners as their individualistic right and overrule its earlier judgement and make Section 377 of IPC as unconstiutional and void. Let the Supreme Court give another progressive judgement.
Recently (April, 2014) the Supreme Court gave a judgement declaring that 'transgender community' as a 'third gender' along with male and female.
The Supreme Court also directed the centre and the states to take steps to treat them as socially and educationally backward classes and extend reservation for them in educational institutions and in public employments. The Supreme Court also observed that transgenders are also citizens of India and they should be given equal opportunities to grow and attain their potential.
This judgement is considered as a progressive one and it will help in mainstreaming of hitherto socially excluded transgenders. Historically, they were never socially exclude from the society in India, but it was the British who with their colonial mindset made legislations which regarded transgenders as criminals and this was the reason for their alienation from the mainstream. By this judgement Supreme Court has upheld the rights of transgenders and also Supreme Court has the right precedence in doing so. Remember, the Supreme Court has given a progressive judgement in this case.
But the same Supreme Court in last month (March, 2014) on an issue related to LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) community gave a judgement which is contradictory to the principle of the first judgement above. The Supreme Court in LGBT issue ordered that the Section 377 of IPC which criminalises unnatural sex(sex among LGBT) is constitutional and those practising unnatural sex are liable for punishment under the law. But earlier the Delhi High Court ordered that the Section 377 of IPC is unconstitutional and void as it violates Articles 14,15 and 21 of the constitution. But the Supreme Court reversed this order of Delhi High Court and recriminalised sex among LGBT i.e, the Supreme Court said that Section 377 of IPC is valid. This judgement is a regressive judgement and it has the effect of social exclusion of LGBT community.
Thus the Supreme Court in the first judgement talks about rights of transgenders and gives a progressive judgement and in the second case the same Supreme Court gives a contradictory judgement which is regressive in nature.
Recently the Supreme Court has accepted the Curative Petition regarding the Section 377 of IPC and has agreed to hear it in the open court. Let us hope that the Supreme Court considers the right of LGBT community to choose their partners as their individualistic right and overrule its earlier judgement and make Section 377 of IPC as unconstiutional and void. Let the Supreme Court give another progressive judgement.
No comments:
Post a Comment