Decriminalizing Section 377

” In addition, under this section, consensual homosexual act is punishable. According to this section, anal and oral sex does not contribute to reproduction and thus, they are against the order of nature. Based on this fact, there are many people who engage in oral and anal sex in their homes but these acts go unpunished. However, several radical changes have been imposed on this section by lobby groups and human rights activists, who feel that the section should be revisited since a majority of the people, are unaware of the interpretation of this section. In addition, they are unaware of the implications that the section has on the heterosexuals. A petition was later filed in February by the Naz Foundation to seeking to decriminalize this act.

As a result, it led to the repeal against the decision made by the high Court through a five judge bench. It is believed that if it is not repealed, then India will be viewed as a non-progressive state. Similarly, it’s believed that the section is against the Indian constitution which states that no person shall be discriminated against on the basis of gender, creed, and caste among others. Socio-historical Discussion The LGBTQ group that comprises of the lesbians, gay, bisexual, and transgender felt that criminalization of the section 377 was against and in gross violation of the human rights. Further, the court decision argued that for people to feel secure, it was important that the Parliament scraps away such laws from the constitution.

Some prominent leaders concurred and opposed the decision by the Supreme Court. For instance, Rajnath Singh supported the conclusion of the Supreme Court arguing that homosexuality was indeed unnatural and there was no need for it to be practiced in the country. In defense of the LGBTQ, several Congress leaders such as P. Chidambaram believed that decriminalization was not the best way possible (Misra, 2009). Despite the fact that some leaders are advocating for alternative sex, it is important to note that homosexuality and heterosexual sex should not affect the privacy and rights of the people. The privacy aspects form part of the reason of life of an individual and therefore, the behavior of infringement and harassment of the rights of the people by the police should be condemned at all costs.