#GS-02 Social Justice

For Prelims:

Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union Of India:

  • Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union of India (2018) case decriminalized consensual homosexuality under IPC section 377.
  • Supreme Court revised its own decision in Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation (2013) case where it had held that Section 377 did not suffer from any “constitutional infirmity”.
  • SC has also noted that homosexuality is documented in 1,500 species and is not unique to humans hence it dispel the prejudice that it is against the order of nature.
  • The judgment said that “Constitutional morality is not confined to the literal text of the Constitution, rather, it must seek to usher in a pluralistic and inclusive society.”

Yogyakarta Principles:

  • Yogyakarta Principles were created in 2006 by a group of international human rights experts who met in Yogyakarta, Indonesia to outline a set of international principles relating to sexual orientation and gender identity.
  • Supreme Court in the Navtej Singh Johar case stated that the ‘Yogyakarta Principles on the Application of International Law in Relation to Issues of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity’ should be applied as a part of Indian law.

The Special Marriage Act of 1954:

  • The Special Marriage Act of 1954 provides a civil form of marriage for couples who cannot marry under their personal law.
  • It allows inter-caste and inter-faith couples who want to marry to get married.

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India (2017):

  • SC in this judgement ruled that Fundamental Right to Privacy is intrinsic to life and liberty and thus, comes under Article 21 of the Indian constitution.
  • SC declared that bodily autonomy was an integral part of the right to privacy.
  • This must be read in conjunction with Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which recognises the right to privacy.

Source “Supreme Court seeks government’s view on allowing same-sex marriage