‘Same-sex marriage not comparable with Indian family unit concept’: A timeline of Section 377

Opposing a batch of petitions searching for authorized recognition of same-sex marriages, the Centre Thursday instructed the Delhi High Court that the decriminalisation of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code doesn’t mechanically translate to the elemental proper for identical intercourse {couples} to marry.
In its affidavit, the federal government stated that there exists a “legitimate State interest” in limiting the popularity of marriage to individuals of reverse intercourse. Permitting identical intercourse {couples} to marry would trigger “a complete havoc with the delicate balance of personal laws in the country”.
Same-sex people in a relationship or dwelling collectively as companions shouldn’t be “not comparable” with the “Indian family unit concept” of a husband, spouse and kids, the federal government stated, arguing that the establishment of marriage has a “sanctity”. “In our country, despite statutory recognition of the relationship of marriage between a biological man and a biological woman, marriage necessarily depends upon age-old customs… societal values.”
With the High Court set to listen to the petitions on April 20, here’s a timeline of India’s combat for homosexual rights:
1861: Introduction of Section 377
Section 377 was launched by British India, modelled on the Buggery Act of 1533. This part of the Buggery Act was drafted by Thomas Macaulay in 1838 and was introduced into impact in 1860. It outlined ‘buggery’ as an unnatural sexual act towards the desire of God and man, thus, criminalising anal penetration, bestiality and homosexuality, in a broader sense.
2001: Naz Foundation recordsdata petition towards Section 377 in Delhi High Court
Over the years, Section 377 had sparked quite a few controversies with activists difficult it in numerous methods. In 2001, Naz Foundation filed a petition difficult the constitutionality of Section 377 within the Delhi High Court. They filed a lawsuit to permit gay relations between consenting adults.
2003: Delhi HC dismisses Naz Foundation plea
The Delhi High Court dismissed the Naz Foundation petition, saying the physique had no standing within the matter. The Naz Foundation appealed the dismissal to the Supreme Court in 2006, which instructed the Delhi High Court to rethink the case.
2009: Delhi HC decriminalises homosexuality
In a landmark choice, the Delhi High Court decriminalised homosexuality amongst consenting adults, holding it in violation of Article 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
2012: Supreme Court overturns the HC order
After HC’s judgment, numerous appeals had been made to the Supreme Court, difficult the High Court’s authority to vary a legislation. In December 2012, the Supreme Court overturned the HC’s choice, after discovering it “legally unsustainable.”
A two-judge bench, comprising Justice G S Singhvi and Justice S J Mukhopadhaya noticed that the HC had neglected the truth that a “minuscule fraction of the country’s population constitutes LGBT,” and that in over 150 years lower than 200 folks had been prosecuted for committing an offence below the part.

The Supreme Court then beneficial that the Parliament deal with the matter as a result of solely they’d the facility to amend the present legal guidelines.
2015: Shashi Tharoor’s Private Member Bill
After the Narendra Modi-led authorities was sworn in in 2014, it stated it could take a choice relating to Section 377 solely after the SC judgment. In a written reply to Lok Sabha, Minister of State (Home) Kiren Rijiju had stated, “The matter is sub-judiced before the Supreme Court. A decision regarding Section 377 of IPC can be taken only after pronouncement of judgment by the Supreme Court.”
A 12 months later, when Shashi Tharoor launched a non-public member’s Bill to decriminalise homosexuality, the Lok Sabha voted towards it.
2016: Five petitioners transfer SC over Section 377
Five petitions had been filed by S Johar, journalist Sunil Mehra, chef Ritu Dalmia, hotelier Aman Nath and enterprise govt Ayesha Kapur. The petition, filed by well-known LGBTQ activists, claimed their “rights to sexuality, sexual autonomy, choice of sexual partner, life, privacy, dignity, and equality, along with the other fundamental rights guaranteed under Part-III of Constitution, are violated by Section 377.”
2018: SC begins listening to on Section 377
A five-judge Constitutional bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and comprising Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra, begins listening to petitions difficult Section 377.

2021: Centre Opposes Same-Sex Marriages in Delhi HC
On Thursday, the Centre opposed a batch of petitions searching for authorized recognition and registration of same-sex marriages. The Centre claimed {that a} marriage between people can’t be handled as a non-public affair, as they invoke “age-old customs, rituals, practices, cultural ethos and societal values” of India.
The Division Bench of Justices Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Amit Bansal has listed the instances for subsequent listening to on April 20.