Section 3. 77 of the Indian Penal Code. Chapter XVI, Section 3. Indian Penal Code dating back to 1. Ipc A 600 Download' title='Ipc A 600 Download' />British rule of India modelled on the Buggery Act of 1. The section was decriminalized with respect to sex between consenting adults by the High Court of Delhi on July 2. That judgement was overturned by the Supreme Court of India on 1. Ban Hack Biet Doi Than Toc Sa. December 2. 01. 3 with the Court holding that amending or repealing Section 3. Parliament, not the judiciary. On 6 February 2. 01. Naz Foundation and others came for hearing in the Supreme Court. The three member bench headed by then the Chief Justice of India T. S. Thakur said that all the 8 curative petitions submitted will be reviewed afresh by a five member constitutional bench. On 2. August 2. 01. Supreme Court ruled that the Right to Privacy was a fundamental right, called for equality and condemned discrimination, stated that the protection of sexual orientation lies at the core of the fundamental rights and that the rights of the LGBT population are real and founded on constitutional doctrine. Unnatural offences Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section. The ambit of Section 3. Thus, even consensual sexual acts such as fellatio and anal penetration may be punishable under this law. Public perceptioneditSupporteditIn 2. Additional Solicitor General PP Malhotra said Homosexuality is a social vice and the state has the power to contain it. Decriminalising homosexuality may create a breach of peace. If it is allowed then the evil of AIDS and HIV would further spread and harm the people. It would lead to a big health hazard and degrade moral values of society. A view similarly shared by the Home Ministry. The 1. December 2. Supreme Court, upholding Section 3. The Daily News and Analysis called it the univocal unity of religious leaders in expressing their homophobic attitude. Usually divisive and almost always seen tearing down each others religious beliefs, leaders across sections came forward in decrying homosexuality and expressing their solidarity with the judgment. The Daily News and Analysis article added that Baba Ramdev, Indias well known yoga guru, after praying that journalists not turn homosexual, stated he could cure homosexuality through yoga and called it a bad addiction. The Vishwa Hindu Parishads vice president Om Prakash Singhal said, This is a right decision, we welcome it. IPC standards and committees for the printed circuit board design, manufacture, assembly and test. IPC is an ANSIaccredited standards developer. Industryconsensus classroom training and certification on IPCA600 Acceptability of Printed Boards. Find a certification center. Homosexuality is against Indian culture, against nature and against science. We are regressing, going back to when we were almost like animals. The SC had protected our culture. The article states that Singhal further went to dismiss HIVAIDS concerns within the LGBT community as, It is understood that when you try to suppress one anomaly, there will be a break out of a few more. Traditionally, Indian culture, or at least Hinduism, has been more ambivalent about homosexuality than Singhal suggests. Maulana Madni of the Jamiat Ulema echoes this in the article, stating that Homosexuality is a crime according to scriptures and is unnatural. People cannot consider themselves to be exclusive of a society. In a society, a family is made up of a man and a woman, not a woman and a woman, or a man and a man. Rabbi Ezekiel Issac Malekar, honorary secretary of the Judah Hyam Synagogue, in upholding the judgment was also quoted as saying In Judaism, our scriptures do not permit homosexuality. Reverend Paul Swarup of the Cathedral Church of the Redemption in Delhi in stating his views on what he believes to be the unnaturalness of homosexuality, stated Spiritually, human sexual relations are identified as those shared by a man and a woman. The Supreme Courts view is an endorsement of our scriptures. Opposition and criticismeditThe Ministry of Home Affairs released figures indicating that nearly 6. Section 3. 77 in 2. LGBT people. 9 According to the NCRB, in 2. Section 3. 77, including 2. Human Rights Watch argues that the law has been used to harass HIVAIDS prevention efforts, as well as sex workers, homosexuals, and other groups at risk of the disease,1. Section 3. 77 may face a life sentence under a special provision of Section 3. Tutorial See Electrical Expert Pdf 8'>Tutorial See Electrical Expert Pdf 8. IPC. 1. 2 The Peoples Union for Civil Liberties has published two reports of the rights violations faced by sexual minorities1. India. 1. 4In 2. Indian literary figures,1. Vikram Seth. The law subsequently came in for criticism from several ministers, most prominently Anbumani Ramadoss1. Oscar Fernandes. 1. In 2. 00. 8, a judge of the Bombay High Court also called for the scrapping of the law. The United Nations said that the ban violates international law. United Nations human rights chief Navi Pillay stated that Criminalising private, consensual same sex sexual conduct violates the rights to privacy and to non discrimination enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which India has ratified, and that the decision represents a significant step backwards for India and a blow for human rights., voicing hope that the Court might exercise its review procedure. View of Political PartieseditSupporteditRajnath Singh, a member of the ruling party BJP and the Home Minister, is on record shortly after the law was re instated in 2. We will state at an all party meeting if it is called that we support Section 3. Yogi Adityanath, BJP MP, endorsed Radevs comments, saying he welcomes the verdict and will oppose any move to decriminalise homosexuality. The Samajwadi Party made it clear that it will oppose any amendments to the section if it comes in Parliament for discussion, calling homosexuality unethical and immoral. Ram Gopal Yadav stated that they support the Supreme Court decision as It is completely against the culture of our nation. OppositioneditFinance Minister and BJP member Arun Jaitley has a different view from Rajnath Singh, saying that Supreme Court should not have reversed the Delhi High Court order which de criminalised consensual sex between gay adults and When millions of people the world over are having alternative sexual preferences, it is too late in the day to propound the view that they should be jailed. In December 2. 01. Indian National Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi came out in support of LGBT rights and said that every individual had the right to choose. He also said These are personal choices. This country is known for its freedom, freedom of expression. So let that be. I hope that Parliament will address the issue and uphold the constitutional guarantee of life and liberty to all citizens of India, including those directly affected by the judgement, he said. The LGBT rights movement in India was also part of the election manifesto of the Congress for the 2. Senior Congress leader and former Finance Minister P Chidambaram expressed his disappointment, saying we have gone back in time and must quickly reverse the judgement. He also said that Section 3. Delhi High Court judgement by Justice AP Shah. The RSS revised its position, the leader Dattatreya Hosabale reportedly saying, no criminalisation, but no glorification either.