India's Supreme Court has upheld a
law criminalising gay sex, setting aside a landmark lower court decision in
2009 which had overturned the colonial-era ban on homosexuality.
The court on Wednesday held that an
homosexual act was punishable under Section 377 of the Indian penal code,
reports quoting the judgement said.
A bench of justice G S Singhvi and
justice SJ Mukhopadhaya delivered the verdict after hearing petitions of
anti-gay right activists besides social and religious organisations against the
earlier Delhi high court order of 2009.
The top court came down heavily on
the federal government describing its approach as “casual” and said it was
concerned that the Indian parliament had not thought fit to discuss the issue.
'Tolerant Indian society'
The federal government had welcomed
the ruling of the earlier Delhi High court on the grounds that the section 377
of the Indian penal code was a relic of the British colonial law and that
Indian society was much more tolerant towards homosexuality, reports said.
The Delhi high court on July 2,
2009, had ruled that sex between two consenting adults in private would not be
an offence.
Section 377 (unnatural offences) of
the IPC makes gay sex a criminal offence, and can result in imprisonment for
life.
Senior BJP politician BP Singhal,
who died in October 2012, was among those who had challenged the high court
verdict on the grounds that such acts were “illegal, immoral and against the
ethos of Indian culture”, the reports said.
Others who challenged the high court
judgment included the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Utkal Christian
Council and Apostolic Churches Alliance.
Gay activists reacted with dismay
and anger at the apex court verdict. Anand Grover, the counsel for Naz
Foundation which was the original petitioner in the high court, was quoted as
saying they were disappointed with the verdict. Stating it was not correct in
law, he said they would appeal for a review of the judgment.
Popular historian Ramachandra Guha
tweeted that the verdict was a step backward towards "barbarism and
medievalism
No comments:
Post a Comment