Google – AFP,
20 December 2013
![]() |
An Indian
activist protests against the Supreme Court ruling reinstating a
ban on gay sex
in Mumbai on December 15, 2013 (AFP/File, Punit Paranjpe)
|
New Delhi —
India's government on Friday filed a petition in the Supreme Court asking it to
review a ruling which upheld the constitutionality of a colonial-era law
criminalising gay sex.
The
government asked in its plea for the top court to reconsider its judgement,
handed down earlier in the month, saying it believed the ruling was
"violative of the principle of equality".
The
Congress-led government told the court in its so-called "review
petition" that it wanted an "open hearing on the matter".
Gay sex had
been effectively legalised in 2009 when the Delhi High Court ruled that a
section of the penal code prohibiting "carnal intercourse against the
order of nature" was an infringement of fundamental rights.
But in a
shock judgement on December 11, a panel of two Supreme Court judges ruled that
the High Court had overstepped its authority and that a law passed in 1860
during British colonial rule was still valid.
"The
position of the central government on this issue has been that the Delhi High
Court verdict... is correct," the government said in its petition Friday.
The Delhi
High Court had said Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code which bans
"unnatural offences" did not apply to sexual relations between
consenting adults as it would violate constitutional guarantees of dignity,
equality and freedom from discrimination.
Section 377
stipulates a punishment of up to life imprisonment for breaking the law.
The 2009
High Court ruling was strongly opposed by religious groups, particularly
leaders of India's Muslim and Christian communities, who appealed to the
Supreme Court.
Following
the Supreme Court decision which triggered wide shock and protests, Law
Minister Kapil Sibal had pledged the government would take "firm and quick
action" to alter what he called an anachronistic law.
The Supreme
Court will now consider the merits of the government's request and decide
whether to re-examine the judgement.
Related Article:

No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.