SC seeks government's response on plea against provision criminalising gay sex
New Delhi, April 23: The Supreme Court on Monday sought the Central government's response on hotelier Kesav Suri challenging Indian Penal Code's Section 377 which criminalises any sort of homosexual activity and other forms of unnatural sex.
Suri, the Managing Director of Lalit Suri Hospitality group, is also a LGBT rights activists.
As the bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud tagged Suri's plea with an earlier pending challenge to Section 377, senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi urged the court to ask the government to respond to the plea.
"I want to know the Central government's stand on the constitutionality of Section 377. For one year, no reply has come," he told the bench.
The top court is already seized of the matter as it had on January 8 had said that it will re-examine its 2013 verdict upholding Section 377 that criminalises gay sex. The matter has been referred to a larger bench.
While agreeing to re-examine 2013 judgment, the court had on January 8, 2018, said observed "a section of people or individuals who exercise their choice should never remain in a state of fear".
Referring the matter to a larger bench, the court had on January 8 said: "Individual autonomy and also individual orientation cannot be atrophied unless the restriction is regarded as reasonable to yield to the morality of the Constitution."
"The morality that public perceives, the Constitution may not conceive of," the court had said making it clear that the "consent between two adults has to be the primary pre-condition. Otherwise the children would become prey, and protection of the children in all spheres has to be guarded and protected".
The top court's January 8 order had come on a petition by Sangeet Natak Akademi awardee Bharatnatyam dancer Navtej Singh Johar, celebrity chef Ritu Dalmia and others holding that Section 377 was "violative of fundamental rights under Article Article 21 (right to life)".
The top court by its 2013 order had set aside a Delhi High Court's July 2, 2009 verdict decriminalising gay sex.
NGO Naz Foundation which is seeking the scraping of Section 377 of IPC had moved the curative petition seeking a relook at its December 12, 2013 judgment and subsequent January 28, 2014 order in a review petition upholding Section 377.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC says no to plea against selection of Delhi Waqf Board administrator
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Monday refused to examine a plea against the appointment of Delhi government’s Principal Secretary (Home) Ashwani Kumar as the Delhi Waqf Board administrator on January 10.
A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal asked the petitioner to move the Delhi High Court.
The top court was hearing a plea filed by one Zameer Ahmad Jumlana seeking directions to restrain and prohibit Kumar from discharging functions as the administrator of the Delhi Waqf Board and to vacate the office with immediate effect.
Lieutenant Governor (LG) V K Saxena, who approved Kumar's appointment, also okayed the appointment of IAS officer Azimul Haque as Delhi Waqf Board's CEO on January 3.
The petition alleged the term of the Delhi State Waqf Board expired on August 26, 2023, and since then no board was constituted.
The plea contended in the absence of the board, its powers were taken over by the LG by appointing Kumar purportedly using the powers under Section 99 of the Waqf Act, 1995.
"When the tenure of the board has lapsed on August 26, 2023, there is no question of exercise of any power of the state government under Section 99 of the Waqf Act 1995 to take over the board. Thus, the respondent number 1 is an usurper of the power of the Delhi State Waqf Board,” it said.
According to the petition, Kumar was not eligible under the Waqf Act of 1995 and took advantage of the fact that the Delhi Waqf Board was in an indefinite abeyance due to the negligence of the respondents.
On May 28, the Delhi High Court dismissed a similar plea filed by one Yasmin Ali and imposed Rs 10,000 costs.
The high court said the plea was publicity-oriented and an abuse of the process of law as it did not give any valid reasons for quashing the appointment of the city government officer as the administrator of the board.
