Correct option is A
The Supreme Court of India in the landmark case of Navtej Singh Johar V. Union of India (2018) unanimously ruled that individual autonomy, intimacy, and identity are protected under the fundamental rights of the Constitution, particularly under Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty). The Court decriminalized Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which previously criminalized consensual homosexual relations. This judgment affirmed the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals to live with dignity, privacy, and autonomy over their intimate decisions.
Information Booster
Navtej Singh Johar V. Union of India (2018)
In this historic judgment, the Supreme Court:
· Struck down parts of Section 377 IPC, which criminalized consensual homosexual acts between adults, as being unconstitutional.
· Emphasized that individual autonomy, dignity, privacy, and intimacy are integral aspects of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.
· Held that sexual orientation is an essential attribute of privacy and that discrimination based on sexual orientation violates Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty).
This judgment was a major step toward recognizing the rights and dignity of LGBTQ+ individuals in India.
Additional Knowledge
(b) Suresh Kumar Kaushal V. Naz Foundation (2013)
In this case, the Supreme Court had reversed the Delhi High Court's ruling and upheld the constitutionality of
Section 377 IPC, stating that LGBTQ+ individuals constituted a "minuscule minority" and that the law's impact on them was not significant. However, this judgment was later overturned by the
Navtej Singh Johar judgment.
(c) Castle Rock V. Gonzales (2005, US Supreme Court)
This is a case from the
United States, where the Supreme Court held that an individual did not have a constitutional right to police enforcement of a restraining order. It is unrelated to the issue of autonomy and fundamental rights as recognized in Indian law.
