Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India (2018)

Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India (2018): Decriminalisation of Homosexuality and Constitutional Morality

Introduction

The Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) judgment is a historic Supreme Court decision that partially struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, decriminalising consensual sexual acts between adults. The ruling marked a decisive affirmation of individual dignity, equality, and constitutional morality over social prejudice.

For UPSC aspirants, this case is essential to understand Fundamental Rights, evolving interpretation of Article 21, constitutional morality, and minority rights.

Background of the Case

• Section 377 of the IPC criminalised “carnal intercourse against the order of nature”
• LGBTQ+ individuals faced discrimination, stigma, and criminal prosecution
• Earlier judgment in Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation (2013) had upheld Section 377
• Petitioners, including Navtej Singh Johar challenged the constitutional validity of Section 377

Constitutional Provisions Involved

• Article 14 – Equality before law
• Article 15 – Prohibition of discrimination
• Article 19 – Freedom of expression
• Article 21 – Right to life and personal liberty

Key Issues Before the Supreme Court

1. Does Section 377 violate the right to equality and dignity?
2. Can majoritarian morality override individual freedoms?
3. Is sexual orientation an essential aspect of personal liberty?

Supreme Court Judgment (2018)

A five-judge Constitution Bench unanimously held that Section 377 is unconstitutional to the extent it criminalises consensual sexual acts between adults.

Key Principles Laid Down

1. Constitutional Morality Over Social Morality

• Fundamental Rights cannot be denied based on popular opinion
• Constitutional values must guide governance

2. Sexual Orientation as an Inherent Attribute

• Sexual orientation is a natural and intrinsic part of identity
• Discrimination based on orientation violates equality

3. Dignity and Privacy

• Criminalisation violates dignity under Article 21
• The judgment built upon the Puttaswamy (2017) privacy ruling

Role of Transformative Constitutionalism

The Court adopted a transformative approach:

• The Constitution as a living document
• Duty to protect marginalized communities
• Emphasis on inclusiveness and pluralism

Significance of the Judgment

1. Expansion of Fundamental Rights

• Strengthened right to dignity, autonomy, and choice

2. Protection of Minority Rights

• Upheld the rights of a sexual minority against majoritarian bias

3. Global Human Rights Alignment

• Brought India in line with international human rights norms

Impact on Indian Society and Law

• Reduced criminal stigma against the LGBTQ+ community
• Influenced policies on workplace inclusion and non-discrimination
• Set precedent for rights-based interpretation in future cases

Criticism of the Judgment

• Opposition based on cultural and religious grounds
• Concerns about societal readiness
• Demand for legislative clarity on related civil rights

Despite criticism, the ruling is widely regarded as progressive.

UPSC Prelims and Mains Relevance

Prelims Focus

• Year – 2018
• Section 377 IPC
• Constitutional morality

Mains (GS-II and GS-IV)

• Rights of marginalized groups
• Role of the judiciary in social reform
• Ethics of equality and dignity

Essay

• Social justice and inclusivity
• The Constitution as a transformative document

Conclusion

The Navtej Singh Johar judgment stands as a defining moment in India’s constitutional journey towards inclusivity and individual freedom. By decriminalising consensual same-sex relations, the Supreme Court dismantled a colonial-era law that violated dignity, equality, and personal liberty. The ruling reaffirmed that constitutional morality, not social prejudice, must guide the interpretation of Fundamental Rights. For UPSC aspirants, this case exemplifies the judiciary’s role in protecting minority rights and advancing transformative constitutionalism. Its long-term significance lies in fostering a rights-based framework where diversity is respected and individual identity is protected under the Constitution, reinforcing India’s commitment to justice, liberty, and equality.

FAQs on Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India (2018)

Q1. Why is the Navtej Singh Johar case important for UPSC?
It decriminalised homosexuality and reinforced constitutional morality.

Q2. Which provision was partially struck down?
Section 377 of the IPC.

Q3. Which earlier judgment was overruled?
Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation (2013).

Q4. Which constitutional value was emphasized?
Dignity and equality under Articles 14 and 21.