Section 377: Supreme Court Legalises Consensual Sex Between Homosexual Adults
India Reacts To Supreme Court's Section 377 Verdict
LGBT Activist, Ashok Row Kavi
"We have finally got justice," Ashok Row Kavi, LGBT rights activist and founder of Humsafar Trust, told ANI. “We are finally ‘azaad in azaad Hind’.”
Congress Leader Shashi Tharoor took to Twitter to welcome the Supreme Court's decision.
“This decision vindicates my stand on Section 377, and on exactly the same grounds of privacy, dignity and constitutional freedoms. It shames those BJP MPs who vociferously opposed me in Lok Sabha,” he added.
"The country gets its oxygen back," said Producer and Director Karan Johar who has previously taken several stands for the LGBT movement. "Decriminalising homosexuality and abolishing #Section377 is a huge thumbs up for humanity and equal rights!" he tweeted.
“All the lawyers and judges who have worked on this are the people to be interviewed and thanked,” said Keshiv Suri, executive director of The Lalit Suri Hospitality Group and a petitioner against Section 377.
“It is massive time to celebrate.”
Justice Chandrachud Congratulates Lawyers Who Fought The Case...And Won
Justice Chandrachud acknowledged lawyers appearing in the case Mukul Rohatgi, Arvind Datar, Menaka Guruswamy, Shyam Divan, Anand Grover and others.
Split Between Values Of Constitution And Values Behind Section 377
There is a split between values on which Section 377 is based and the values of the Constitution, said Justice DY Chandrachud. The denial of right to sexual orientation is also denial of right to privacy, he said.
- Colonial law made gays and lesbians subordinate to other individuals of the society.
- Gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders continued to be denied equal rights seven decades after independence.
- Sexual orientation has become a means to target and blackmail.
- It is difficult to right the wrongs of history. But we can set the course for the future.
- LGBT members are entitled to have all the rights of citizenship.
- Sexual minorities were forced to live as second class citizens.
- This case is about a right which every human being has, to live with dignity.
- What is natural and unnatural? And who decides? Do we allow the state to decide what is natural and unnatural between consenting adults?
- Constitution protects diversity in all its facets. It does not demand conformity.
- Section 377 rests on deep rooted gender stereotypes.
- Privacy judgment rejected the argument that rights of the LGBT community is illusory.
- Human sexuality cannot be reduced to a binary
- Society cannot dictate sexual acts between consenting adults.
- State has no business to intrude in these personal matters.
- Citizens of a democracy cannot be forced to push their lives into obscurity by a colonial era law.