Thread by @TheLeaflet_in

#Section377

Five-judge Constitution bench to assemble at 11:30 AM to pronounce judgment on the constitutional validity of section 377 of the IPC.

#Section377

Bench has assembled.

All are concurring opinions.

CJI+ Justice Khanwilkar- no one can escape from their individuality. CJI cites John Mills. One defines oneself.

CJI+ Khanwilkar, J.- prejudice notions, social exclusion are still faced by individuals.

LGBT community posses same human rights, constitutional rights like any other individual. 377 is irrational, manifestly arbitrary and indefensible.

CJI + J Khanwilkar speak of natural and human rights. "Equality is the edifice on which the entire non-discrimination jurisprudence exists."

Concept of identity cannot be a prison-hold, it cannot be only one identity.

Conclusion:
1. Self-determination in tandem with NALSAR.
2. In line with Naz Foundation judgment, Delhi HC 2009

3. Constitution is capable of extension, to include expansion of laws in keeping with the changing times. The role of the courts become more important when a group has been deprived since time immemorial .

CJI+ Khanwilkar, J.- Concept of identity cannot be prison hold only for one identity. View taken by Court in Suresh Koushal case is impermissible under the Constitution.

4. Words be ought to be interpreted

5. constitutional mortality- preserve the the heterogeneous nature of a society. Social morality cannot be used as an index of measurement.

6. Right to live to with dignity. Without the right to dignity, other rights can be trumped.

7. Sexual orientation is one of the many biological phenomena which is natural and is controlled by biological and neurological phenomena. Otherwise is in violation to fundamental rights.

8. Rights evolve with the evolution of the society.

Autonomy is individualistic. He/she can submit the autonomy to each other with choice.

CJI+ Khanwilkar, J.

#Section377 is violative of Article 14. Unreasonable classification with no nexus with object. Partially strikes down as violative of Article 14 since it penalises even consensual sex.

CJI+Khanwilkar, J.- Sexual orientation is natural phenomena. Any discrimination on this basis is violative of the Constitution. Individual has sovereignty over his/her body.

Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman is now reading from his judgment. He's giving the historical context of #Section377

CJI+ Khanwilkar, J.-. #Section377 is violative of Article 14. Unreasonable classification with no nexus with object. Partially strikes down as violative of Article 14 since it penalises even consensual sex.

Rohinton J: Homosexuality isn't a mental disorder.

Rohinton J: Homosexuality isn't a mental disorder. Yogyakarta Principles directly apply. Homosexuals have right to live with dignity.

Union of India to give wide publicity to this judgment.

Finally, why Suresh Kumar Koushal cannot stay. And homosexuals are entitled to the constitutional rights.

The Union of India should take all measures to broadcasters it in regular intervals to reduce and eliminate stigma

Police be given be periodic sensitisation lessons.

Rohinton J concurs with CJI and signs off his opinion.

Next Justice DY Chandrachud.

D Y Chandrachud, J.- Section 377 denies equal participation. Individual liberty is a soul of the Constitution.

The lethargy of law is manifest again. A 157 years ago colonial law

Talks about love. Lost the line

Civilisation has been brutal.

Macaulay's legacy has existed despite we having our own constitution

We must as a society ask certain questions. We become the cause and not just the inheritors.

Our constitution does not ask to confirm. Dissent is the safety valve of democracy.
Section 377 has been destructive of identity.

Sexual orientation has become a cause of blackmail in the time of technology.

D Y Chandrachud, J.- section 377 provides rule by the law instead of rule of the law. It encourages discrimination and stereotyping .

LGBT have rights to be equal citizens in all manifestations.

#Section377 is deeply rooted in majoritarian standards.

J Chandrachud:

Human sexuality cannot be defined narrowly. LGBTQI peoples have a right to equality of protection under the Constitution. Discrimination against LGBTQI is unconstitutional.

Reads a poem.

Justice Chandrachud: Decriminalisation of #Section377 is of course necessary, but it's just the first step.

D Y Chandrachud, J.:

Constitutional morality will prevail. Society cannot dictate sexuality of an individual. State has no business to intrude into these personal matters. #Section377 is unconstitutional to the extent it penalises consensual sex between two adults.

DY Chandrachud J. signs off, concurring with CJI.

Justice Indu Malhotra starts. She too concurs with the CJI's opinion.

#Section377

#BREAKING

Five-judge Constitution Bench consisting of CJI Dipak Misra, Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud & Indu Malhotra, holds #Section377 of the IPC unconstitutional, to the extent that it criminalises consensual sexual acts of adults in private.

LGBTQI lawyers from @LCHIVWRI - including Anand Grover, Tripti Tandon, Suraj Sanap, and their former colleagues Mihir Samson, Amritananda Chakravorty, and others — celebrate the historic judgment reading down #Section377. Challenge to Section377 been a journey of 18 years.