Correct option is A
The correct answer is
(a) Navtej Singh Johar V. Union of India. In this landmark 2018 judgment, the Supreme Court of India decriminalized consensual same-sex relationships by reading down
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which had criminalized "unnatural offences." The Court held that
constitutional morality must take precedence over
social morality. The judgment emphasized that societal norms cannot dictate the rights guaranteed under the Constitution, particularly the right to dignity, privacy, and equality enshrined in
Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The ruling was a milestone in LGBTQ+ rights in India and underscored that constitutional principles, like individual freedom and non-discrimination, are paramount. The Court made it clear that the Constitution's commitment to liberty and equality cannot be compromised by prevailing social prejudices or majoritarian views on morality.
Information Booster
Constitutional Morality vs.
Social Morality: The concept of
constitutional morality refers to adherence to the values, principles, and rights enshrined in the Constitution. It requires that laws and their interpretations reflect constitutional principles rather than societal norms, which may be influenced by prejudice, stereotypes, or discrimination.
Social morality, on the other hand, reflects the collective values or moral standards of society at a given time, which may not always align with the progressive principles of justice, equality, and human dignity enshrined in the Constitution.
In the
Navtej Singh Johar case, the Supreme Court gave preference to
constitutional morality by affirming that the dignity and rights of individuals, especially those from marginalized communities, must be protected. The judgment argued that social morality, often rooted in outdated and discriminatory practices, cannot justify the violation of fundamental rights.
Key Aspects of the Judgment:
1.
Decriminalization of Consensual Same-Sex Relationships: The Court held that criminalizing consensual relationships between adults violates the constitutional principles of equality and privacy.
2.
Right to Privacy: The decision built on the earlier
Puttaswamy judgment (Right to Privacy case), which recognized privacy as an integral part of the fundamental right to life and liberty under
Article 21.
3.
Equality and Non-Discrimination: The Court affirmed that sexual orientation is an inherent part of a person’s identity and that discrimination based on sexual orientation violates the constitutional guarantees of equality under
Article 14.
4.
Impact on Social Norms: The judgment recognized that laws often reflect social biases, but it is the duty of the Court to uphold constitutional values, even if they go against social or cultural norms.
