Homosexuality in the Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of India

Aravani as Citizen: The Forging of a Sexual Identity

“…One in the Hindu way in the morning where a brahmin does the pooja, whereas a concluding ceremony called as 'roundap' is done the Muslim way where widowed Aravanis get coloured saris gifted by other members (Revathi A., 2010). Properties owned by gurus are inherited by chelas (Naik, 2017).…”

“…A chela can leave the guru and the community, but it is considered as a bad gesture. Such chelas are not welcomed whole heartedly by other community members, they find it difficult to find a place for their business activities in any area under the jurisdiction of the jamaat" (Naik, 2017).…”

Homosexuality and Indian Civil Society: Reading Mahesh Dattani After Decriminalization of Section-377

“…Yeshwant Naik writes that the concept of homosexuality has been present in India since ‘time immemorial’, and was never considered a sin by Hinduism although ‘viewed worthy of punishment’ (Naik, 2017, p. 8). In ancient India, homosexuality resulted in certain punishments, like tonsuring, being made to ride a donkey and the loss of caste.…”

“…But in December 2013, the Supreme Court set aside the Delhi High Court verdict, pronouncing ‘same-sex relations’ as ‘unnatural’, and thus recriminalized gay sex even between two consenting adults (Venkatesan, 2013). This judgement, according to commentators, showed the ‘lack of proper knowledge about gender identity and sexual orientation on the part of law-makers and the Judiciary [which] ha[d] caused many misconceptions and prejudices regarding homosexuality and issues connected thereto’ (Naik, 2017, p. 19). Then, in a landmark ruling of 6 September 2018, the Supreme Court of India overturned a 2013 judgement that upheld a colonial-era law, Section 377, under which gay sex is categorized as an ‘unnatural offence’ (BBC News 2018).…”

“…Socially sanctified marriage becomes a subterfuge to pass for ‘normal’, and enable continuity of a life in the closet as also happens in Do the Needful . Naik reads such a choice as an ‘instance of enduring hegemonic masculinity [which] is the existence of men who are gay in private and married in public, a phenomenon which is highly prevalent in India’ (Naik, 2017, p. 124). The family as a unit which fortifies the inviolable social norm of marriage is valorized in such circumstances, mainly so because ‘the family [i]s an agency of control and point of sexual saturation’ and ‘it was in the “bourgeois” or “aristocratic” family that the sexuality of children and adolescents was problematised’ (Foucault, 2008, p. 120).…”