background preloader

India

Facebook Twitter

Homosexuality in India. Homosexuality is mostly a taboo subject in Indian civil society and for the government.

Homosexuality in India

Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code makes sex with persons of same gender punishable by law. On 2 July 2009, in Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, the Delhi High Court held that provision to be unconstitutional with respect to sex between consenting adults, but the Supreme Court of India overturned that ruling on 11 December 2013, stating that the Court was instead deferring to Indian legislators to provide the sought-after clarity.[1] Religion has played a role in shaping Indian customs and traditions.

While homosexuality has not been explicitly mentioned in the religious texts central to Hinduism, the largest religion in India, Hinduism has taken various positions, ranging from positive to neutral or antagonistic. History[edit] Legal status[edit] Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) dating back to 1861 makes homosexual sex punishable by law and carries a ten year sentence.[16] Hijra (South Asia) Hijras, (Hindi: हिजड़ा, Urdu: ہِجڑا‎, Bengali: হিজড়া, Kannada: ಹಿಜಡಾ, Telugu: హిజ్ర Punjabi ਹਿਜੜਾ), also known as chhakka in Kannada and Bambaiya Hindi, khusra (ਖੁਸਰਾ) in Punjabi and kojja in Telugu, is used to refer to individuals in South Asia who are transexual or transgender.[1][2] Transgender people are also known as Aravani, Aruvani or Jagappa in other areas of India.[3] It is a common misconception among South Asians that hijras are "only men who have feminine gender identity, adopt feminine gender roles and wear women's clothing".

Hijra (South Asia)

In reality, the community is significantly more diverse.[4] In Pakistan, the hijras identify themselves as either female, male, or third gender. The term more commonly advocated by social workers and transgender community members themselves is 'khwaaja sira' (Urdu: خواجه سرا‎), and can identify the individual as a transexual person, transgender person (khusras), cross-dresser (zenanas) or eunuch (narnbans).[5][6] Hijras belong to a special caste.

British Raj. The British Raj (rāj, lit.

British Raj

"rule" in Hindi)[2] was the British rule in the Indian subcontinent between 1858 and 1947.[3] The term can also refer to the period of dominion.[3][4] The region under British control—commonly called "India" in contemporary usage—included areas directly administered by the United Kingdom[5] (contemporaneously, "British India") as well as the princely states ruled by individual rulers under the paramountcy of the British Crown. The region was less commonly also called the Indian Empire.[6] As India, it was a founding member of the League of Nations, a participating nation in the Summer Olympics in 1900, 1920, 1928, 1932, and 1936, and a founding member of the United Nations in San Francisco in 1945.[7] Geographical extent[edit] The British Raj extended over almost all present-day India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, with exceptions such as Goa and Pondicherry.

British India and the Native States[edit] (4.) Major provinces[edit] Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. Protesting the Indian Supreme Court's reinstatement of sodomy laws.

Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code

Chapter XVI, Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code dating back to 1861,[1] introduced during the British rule of India, criminalises sexual activities "against the order of nature", arguably including homosexual acts. The section was declared unconstitutional with respect to sex between consenting adults by the High Court of Delhi on 2 July 2009. That judgement was overturned by the Supreme Court of India on 12 December 2013, with the Court holding that amending or repealing Section 377 should be a matter left to Parliament, not the judiciary. History[edit] 377. The ambit of Section 377, which was devised to criminalize and prevent homosexual sex[citation needed] extends to any sexual union involving penile insertion. Public perception[edit] Support[edit] In 2008 Additional Solicitor General PP Malhotra said: Opposition and criticism[edit] Legal battle[edit] The two judge bench went on to hold that: