LIJDLR

LGBTQIA+ Rights

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 »

JUDGEMENT COMMENT: SUPRIYO CHAKRABORTY & ANR V. UOI

Volume IV Issue I /

JUDGEMENT COMMENT: SUPRIYO CHAKRABORTY & ANR V. UOI Saanjh Inuganti, Third Year B.A.LL. B student of Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies, Navi Mumbai (India) Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2026.v04.48 The present article critically examines the landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India in Supriyo Chakraborty & Anr v. Union of India (2023), which addressed the question of legal recognition of same-sex marriages in India. The case arose from petitions filed by several same-sex couples seeking recognition of their unions under existing statutory frameworks, particularly the Special Marriage Act, 1954, the Foreign Marriage Act, 1969, and the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The petitioners contended that the exclusion of same-sex couples from the institution of marriage violates fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India, including equality before the law, non-discrimination, personal liberty, and the right to dignity. The Union of India opposed the petitions, arguing that the existing statutory scheme governing marriage was designed to regulate heterosexual unions and that recognition of same-sex marriage would involve complex policy considerations affecting multiple legislations. It was further argued that such a socio-legal transformation falls within the legislative domain rather than the judicial sphere. A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict (3:2) on 17 October 2023, declining to recognize same-sex marriages under existing law. While the majority held that there is no fundamental right to marry and that any recognition of same-sex marriage must come through legislative action, the Court unanimously affirmed the constitutional rights and dignity of LGBTQIA+ individuals. The decision nevertheless left open the possibility of future legislative reform. This article analyses the competing constitutional arguments presented before the Court, evaluates the reasoning adopted in the majority and minority opinions, and offers critical observations on the implications of the judgment for the evolving discourse on marriage equality and LGBTQIA+ rights in India.

JUDGEMENT COMMENT: SUPRIYO CHAKRABORTY & ANR V. UOI Read More »