Correct option is D
The correct answer is
(d) Suresh Kumar Kaushal v. Naz Foundation (2013) . In this case, the Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutional validity of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.), which criminalizes "carnal intercourse against the order of nature." The Court overturned the 2009 Delhi High Court decision in
Naz Foundation v. Government of NCT of Delhi, which had decriminalized consensual homosexual acts between adults.
·
Key Points from the Judgment:
·
Section 377 I.P.C.: The Supreme Court reinstated Section 377, holding that the provision was constitutionally valid. Section 377 was interpreted to include consensual sexual acts between adults in private, labeling such acts as "against the order of nature."
·
Role of the Legislature: The Court emphasized that any change in the law, such as the decriminalization of homosexuality, should be made by the legislature rather than the judiciary.
·
Impact on LGBTQ+ Rights: This judgment had a significant impact on LGBTQ+ rights in India, as it effectively recriminalized consensual same-sex relationships until Section 377 was later read down by the Supreme Court in
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018).
Information Booster:
1.
Section 377 I.P.C.: A colonial-era law that criminalized "carnal intercourse against the order of nature," which was often interpreted to criminalize homosexuality.
2.
Naz Foundation Case (2009): The Delhi High Court had decriminalized consensual homosexual acts, but this decision was overturned by the Supreme Court in the
Suresh Kumar Kaushal case.
3.
Judicial Review vs. Legislative Action: The Supreme Court's decision in this case highlighted the tension between judicial review and the need for legislative action in matters of social reform.
4.
Later Developments: In 2018, the Supreme Court in
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India decriminalized consensual homosexual acts, effectively overruling the
Suresh Kumar Kaushal decision.
5.
LGBTQ+ Rights: The
Suresh Kumar Kaushal judgment was widely criticized for its impact on LGBTQ+ rights and was a significant setback for the community until it was reversed.
Additional Information:
·
National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (a): This 2014 case recognized the rights of transgender persons but did not involve Section 377.
·
Charu Khurana v. Union of India (b): This 2015 case dealt with gender discrimination in the film industry.
·
Jaya Bhaduri v. Union of India (c): This is a hypothetical option and not related to any significant constitutional case.
