Live
- NASA Tracks Five Giant Asteroids on Close Approach to Earth Today
- Pushpa 2 Hits ₹1000 Crore in 6 Days: How It Compares to Other Top Indian Films
- Vivo X200 and X200 Pro Launched in India: Price, Specifications, and Features
- Nitin Gadkari Admits Feeling Embarrassed at Global Summits Over Rising Road Accidents in India
- Comprehensive Review on Indiramma Housing Survey and Welfare Initiatives Conducted via Video Conference
- Jogulamba Temple Records Rs 1.06 Crore Hundi Revenue in 150 Days
- Opposition Slams ‘One Nation, One Election’ Bill as Anti-Democratic; BJP Allies Support the Move
- Celebrate Karthigai Maha Deepam Virtually with Sri Mandir’s LIVE Darshan Experience
- BJP Extends Support to Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan Employees' Strike, Demands Immediate Regularization and Welfare Benefits
- Dr. M. Priyanka Stresses Quality Education, Nutritious Meals, and Cleanliness in Schools
Landmark SC verdict on transgenders
The Supreme Court on June 30 refused to modify its 2014 order on transgenders while clarifying that lesbians, gays and bisexuals are not third gender.
The Supreme Court on June 30 refused to modify its 2014 order on transgenders while clarifying that lesbians, gays and bisexuals are not third gender. A bench comprising Justices A K Sikri and N V Ramana said it is amply clear from the verdict of April 15, 2014 that lesbians, gays and bisexuals are not transgenders.
In a landmark verdict, the Supreme Court had on April 15, 2014 granted legal recognition to transgenders or eunuchs as third category of gender and had directed the Centre and all states to treat them as socially and educationally backward classes to extend reservation in admission in educational institutions and for public appointments. It had also said that section 377 of IPC is being misused by police and other authorities against them and their social and economic condition is far from satisfactory.
The third gender people would be considered as OBCs, the SC had said then. Underscoring the right to personal autonomy and self-determination under Article 21, the Court observed that “the gender to which a person belongs is to be determined by the person concerned”. The decision recognises the right of a person to identify in the gender that they relate to, that is, male, female or third gender, irrespective of medical/surgical intervention.
The Court also protected one’s gender expression by invoking the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and held that “no restriction can be placed on one’s personal appearance or choice of dressing, subject to the restrictions contained in Article 19(2) of the Constitution.” The Supreme Court also firmly secured the right to equality and equal protection for transgender persons under Articles 14, 15 and 16 by prohibiting discrimination on the ground of gender identity.
It has broadened the scope of the term ‘sex’ in Articles 15 and 16, which till recently meant biological sex of male and female, to include ‘psychological sex’ or ‘gender identity’. Significantly, the Court also declared that no one can be discriminated against on the ground of sexual orientation.
Freedom and equality are further strengthened by the Court’s observations on dignity, privacy, personhood and the free spirit of the human being, which are necessary for the human ‘personality to flower to its fullest’. The Court emphatically noted that dignity cannot be realized if a person is forced to grow up and live in a gender, which they do not identify with or relate to, writes lawyerscollective.org.
