LIJDLR

Gender Identity

LEGAL RIGHTS OF LGBTQ+ & CHALLENGES IN THE CONTEMPORARY ERA

Volume IV Issue III /

LEGAL RIGHTS OF LGBTQ+ & CHALLENGES IN THE CONTEMPORARY ERA Dr. Komal N. Khajone, Assistant Professor, School of Law, G H Raisoni University, Amravati (India) Dr. Sandeep C. Nagarale, Professor, Swatantrya Senani Jawahrlal Darda College of Law, Yavatmal (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.268 Recognition and enforcement of the rights of LGBTQIA+ individuals is setting up a landmark for current constitutional and human rights debates. People who identify with the LGBTQIA+ umbrella have traditionally been marginalized and criminalized by society, and denied legal recognition of their identity, dignity and equality, and have waged a protracted struggle for equality before the law. The right to self-identified gender was acknowledged in the case of National Legal Services Authority (NLSA) v. Union of India, while the right to sexual autonomy was upheld in the decriminalisation of consensual homosexuality between adults in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India. Beyond these, the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 will prohibit discrimination and promote welfare programs for transgender people – but the process to certify the act has faced criticism, as well as the lack of reservations. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) was replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 which removed Section 377 which provided no legal protection for male victims of non-consensual sexual acts. The IPC was replaced by Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which was intended to remove Section 377, but had no gender-neutral sexual offence provision for non-consensual sexual acts. The doctrinal method adopted in this paper highlights the evolution of rights of the LGBTQIA+ community in India from a constitutional perspective of equality and non-discrimination, privacy and personal liberty and explores adoption rights and marriage rights as outlined in the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 and the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The paper concludes by emphasising the importance of effective enforcement, sensitisation programmes and intersectional legal protection to create tangible social inclusion and realise constitutional rights that are due to the LGBTQIA+ community in India.

LEGAL RIGHTS OF LGBTQ+ & CHALLENGES IN THE CONTEMPORARY ERA Read More »

GENDER IDENTITY IN THE METAVERSE: LEGAL GAPS AND SOCIETAL BARRIERS IN VIRTUAL SPACES

Volume III Issue IV /

GENDER IDENTITY IN THE METAVERSE: LEGAL GAPS AND SOCIETAL BARRIERS IN VIRTUAL SPACES Annie Sharon Lloyd, 4th Year BBA LLB student at Kristu Jayanti College of Law(India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.213 This article is a product of the intersection of digital sociology, law, ethics, and gender studies and discusses gender identity in the metaverse with a focus on the current legal loopholes and social obstacles that disproportionately impact non-cisgender people. First, we explain how interaction and avatar technology builds identity expression on platforms such as ZEPETO and VRChat. Research indicates that sophisticated avatar customization and applications such as voice changers enable users to navigate and validate their gender identities offline. However, most mainstream virtual environments limit gender choices, constrain subtle expression, and expose the users, especially women and gender-diverse people, to virtual harms such as misgendering, harassment, and virtual sexual assault. These harms, although digital, often have real psychological effects, but fall into grey zones of jurisdiction and enforcement. Second, we evaluate shortcomings of existing legal and regulatory structures, from tort law and data protection laws to intellectual property norms and their insufficiency in tackling the specific varieties of harm in virtual environments. The findings reveal grave inconsistencies in the application of privacy, consent, and responsibility in immersive environments. Most users complain that they have few remedies through ineffective internal complaint mechanisms or the unavailability of a court remedy. In light of these insights, the research proposes certain legal reforms and international policy coordination, as well as platform inclusive design guidelines, including varying gender options for avatars, voice and identity-sensitive options, safety-by-design mediated tools, and public education. These efforts seek to ultimately develop digital realms that recognize gender identity as a class protected by the law and foster and advance equality and safety across the metaverse. 

GENDER IDENTITY IN THE METAVERSE: LEGAL GAPS AND SOCIETAL BARRIERS IN VIRTUAL SPACES Read More »

Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1

Volume III Issue II /

Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1 Rama Dutt, Harlal School of Law, Greater Noida Mohit Dutt, Karam Safety India Pvt. Ltd Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.70 The Supreme Court of India, in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, addressed the constitutional validity of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalized consensual sexual acts between adults of the same sex. The petitioners, comprising individuals from the LGBTQ+ community, contended that Section 377 infringed upon their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. The Court unanimously held that Section 377, to the extent it criminalized consensual sexual conduct between adults, was unconstitutional. It emphasized that sexual orientation is an inherent aspect of identity and that the right to privacy and dignity is fundamental. The judgment overruled the previous decision in Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation and reaffirmed the principles laid down in Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi.This landmark decision marked a significant step towards ensuring equality and non-discrimination for the LGBTQ+ community in India, aligning the nation’s legal framework with constitutional morality and human rights principles.

Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1 Read More »