Section 377: The Double-Speak Conundrum
constitutional bar_exam advanced concept_confusionKya main hi confused hoon ya sirf meri nazar mein? Read Section 377 of our Constitution, abhi to vah criminal law se related hai, but then you get to think that kya yeh Constitution mein bhi part hai? The "reasonable restrictions" clause under Article 19(2) states that it's up to the state to decide what's reasonable. But then, in Section 377, it says that unnatural sex is an offense, but at the same time, the Supreme Court says it's against personal liberty under Article 21. Kya yeh double speak hai? Is the Constitution saying one thing and the laws saying another? Yeh confusion hai jiska hal nahi mil raha, specially in light of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India 2018.
1 comments
1 Comments
Sign in to join the discussion.
Yaar, I feel Section 377 ka issue toh hamesha discuss hoga. Agree to the fact that the Supreme Court initially criminalized same-sex relationships, but it's heartening to see how they rectified their stance in 2018. My point is, it's not just the judiciary that's at fault, even our societal norms play a significant role in this double-speak conundrum.