Skip to main content

SC will not review judgment against homosexuality

In a major setback to gay rights activists, the Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to review its December 11 judgment, holding that homosexuality or unnatural sex between two consenting adults
was illegal.
A Bench of Justices H. L. Dattu and S. J. Mukhopadhaya held that this provision (Section 377 of the IPC) did not suffer from any constitutional infirmity and said there were no grounds to interfere with the order.
The Centre, the Naz Foundation and several gay activists had filed petitions for a review of the judgment.
Now, the option before them is to file a curative petition, which will be heard by four or five senior-most judges. Naz Foundation executive director Anjali Gopalan did not seem surprised.
“The decision was on expected lines as there is a very rare chance of a petition getting heard. It shows the issue is not at all important for them.”
Anjan Joshi of NGO Empowerment, another group fighting for decriminalising gay sex, said his organisation would file a curative petition. “It [the ruling] is very disappointing. How can they not see any important reason for reviewing the ruling?”
In the evening, members of the Naz Foundation and other gay rights activists staged a demonstration at Jantar Mantar.
In its petition, the Centre said the law must reflect social change and the aspirations of society. “There has been a sea change, not just in India but all over the world, in the law on homosexuality. A majority of the countries have legalised homosexuality.”
Section 377, it maintained, “was introduced not as a reflection of existing Indian values and traditions. It was imposed on the Indian society owing to the moral values of the colonisers.”
Central government and gay rights activists had filed petitions for a review

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NGT terminates chairmen of pollution control boards in 10 states (downtoearth,)

Cracking the whip on 10 State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) for ad-hoc appointments, the National Green Tribunal has ordered the termination of Chairpersons of these regulatory authorities. The concerned states are Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Kerala, Rajasthan, Telangana, Haryana, Maharashtra and Manipur. The order was given last week by the principal bench of the NGT, chaired by Justice Swatanter Kumar. The recent order of June 8, 2017, comes as a follow-up to an NGT judgment given in August 2016. In that judgment, the NGT had issued directions on appointments of Chairmen and Member Secretaries of the SPCBs, emphasising on crucial roles they have in pollution control and abatement. It then specified required qualifications as well as tenure of the authorities. States were required to act on the orders within three months and frame Rules for appointment [See Box: Highlights of the NGT judgment of 2016 on criteria for SPCB chairperson appointment]. Having

High dose of Vitamin C and B3 can kill colon cancer cells: study (downtoearth)

In a first, a team of researchers has found that high doses of Vitamin C and niacin or Vitamin B3 can kill cancer stem cells. A study published in Cell Biology International showed the opposing effects of low and high dose of vitamin C and vitamin B3 on colon cancer stem cells. Led by Bipasha Bose and Sudheer Shenoy, the team found that while low doses (5-25 micromolar) of Vitamin C and B3 proliferate colon cancer stem cells, high doses (100 to 1,000 micromolar) killed cancer stem cells. Such high doses of vitamins can only be achieved through intravenous injections in colon cancer patients. The third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, colon cancer can be prevented by an intake of dietary fibre and lifestyle changes. While the next step of the researchers is to delineate the mechanisms involved in such opposing effects, they also hope to establish a therapeutic dose of Vitamin C and B3 for colon cancer stem cell therapy. “If the therapeutic dose gets validated under in vivo

SC asks Centre to strike a balance on Rohingya issue (.hindu)

Supreme Court orally indicates that the government should not deport Rohingya “now” as the Centre prevails over it to not record any such views in its formal order, citing “international ramifications”. The Supreme Court on Friday came close to ordering the government not to deport the Rohingya. It finally settled on merely observing that a balance should be struck between humanitarian concern for the community and the country's national security and economic interests. The court was hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, began by orally indicating that the government should not deport Rohingya “now”, but the government prevailed on the court to not pass any formal order, citing “international ramifications”. With this, the status quo continues even though the court gave the community liberty to approach i