The document discusses the contentious nature of Article 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalizes homosexuality, referencing the Supreme Court's decision that upheld this law in 2013 despite a previous ruling by the Delhi High Court that deemed it unconstitutional. It argues against the labeling of homosexuality as 'unnatural,' drawing on cultural and historical contexts to illustrate acceptance of diverse sexual orientations in Indian heritage. The text calls for a re-evaluation of societal attitudes towards homosexuality, emphasizing fundamental rights and the need for legislative change.

1. ARTICLE 377 of The Indian Penal Code
“If you don’t like something, change it. If you can’t change it, change your
Attitude.”
Above is quotation by Maya Angelou that applies very aptly to the current
Societal Setup than it has ever before. The Current Day situation with
respect to Article 377 is very contentious. There are People (People of the
LGBT Community) who are affected by recent Supreme Court decision in
Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation in which The Supreme Court of
India declared Homosexuality as a Crime and also tagged it as Unnatural
and in a way this decision has taken from the People of LGBT (Lesbian,
Gay, Bi-Sexual and Transgender) Community their Fundamental Rights
like that of Privacy, Dignity, Liberty, etc. and on top of that this decision
has branded them as Criminals.
Before going any more further lets just know
that what is Section. 377 of the Indian Penal Code. The First Law
Commission chaired by Thomas Babington Macaulay was responsible for
The Indian Penal Code which came as a Draft in 1837 and was finally

2. approved and brought into force on January 1, 1862. That Act had in it
Section 377 which said “Unnatural offences.-- Whoever voluntarily has
carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or
animal, shall be punished with 1[ 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.”
The Indian Penal Code was framed when India was under the
Rule of the East India Company and it was framed by an Englishman and
history can be attributed to the now contentious Section 377 of the IPC,
Years before formation of the United Kingdom, Christianity and
Homosexuality clashed, and at that time under the English Law, Anal Sex
and Zoophilia were identified as offences punishable by Hanging as a
result of The Buggery Act of 1533 pioneered by Henry V1II, and this was
what transpired into the Indian Penal Code and that is what still exists
even after 150 Years of its formation without the slightest of change in its
Original form.
The Section 377 of the Indian Penal in layman’s terms
lays that If two Person of the same gender indulge in a sexual
relationship, that would be punishable with the sentence extending to
even Life Imprisonment. This Section of IPC was challenged in Naz
Foundation v. National Capital Territory of Delhi in the Delhi High Court in
2009 and then this Case the Delhi High Court held Section 377 of IPC as
Unconstitutional and struck it down and this Decision of Delhi High Court
was challenged in The Supreme Court of India in Suresh Kumar Koushal v.
Naz Foundation and in 2013 The Supreme Court of India upheld the
validity of Section 377 of IPC thus over-ruling the Decision of the Delhi
High Court and thus criminalized sexual activities that are against the
order of nature and the Supreme Court said that it should be left to the
Parliament to strike down the Provision and thus legalize Homosexuality
but on the same page, In Lily Thomas v. Union of India the Supreme Court
declared Section 8(4) of Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 as being
beyond the Legislative competence of Parliament and thus it took a leap
in Decriminalization of Politics, though it was a very great and

3. commendable effort but the question is not that, the real question is that
in that instance, Supreme Court took its own cognizance and repealed a
Section of an Act and in this Case it had to do just the same thing, as the
Delhi High Court had earlier struck down Section 377 of IPC and only
confirmation to the said decision was needed in the Supreme Court but
the Supreme Court hesitated to take a brave step forward and left the
tough task to the Parliament of India thus transferring the Burden.
Now as far as the Question of Homosexuality being Un-Natural
is concerned, the word un-natural in itself is very vague as Oxford
Dictionary defines it as “contrary to the ordinary course of nature” so
what seems pretty natural to me, may not be natural to you, so if
someone feels to be Gay, he has the right and also the choice to be who
they want to be, its not un-natural just because the majority of the
population does not feel like being Gay, if I feel something, I have the
Fundamental Right to chase that feeling as long as it does not infringe the
Fundamental Right of others, So if me and my Partner are Gay, then it
very well does not enter into the ambit of others and hence I should be
allowed to do it and not being labeled as a criminal for it, Just because by
being Gay one would have to adopt Child does not mean that its
unnatural. One of the oldest and most sacred and pious text of India, the
Rig-Veda says “Urkriti Evam Prakriti” which means that what seems Unnatural is also natural, so this very well goes the conclusion as that being
Homosexual is normal and not un-natural because that is the way one
feels and that has to be understood by the majority of the People, its not
that what they do is the only Right Way of doing things.
Vishwa Hindu Parishad recently after the Verdict of
Supreme Court said that “Homosexuality is against Indian Culture” but
they should be enlightened with the fact that we Indians take pride in our
rich cultural heritage and the Hindu Temples that were built around the
Sixth Century B.C. have on their walls images of Gods, Goddesses,
Demons , etc. and in those images on the walls of the Ancient Hindu
Temples, one can find erotic images which include Elephants seen
copulating with Tigers, Monkeys molesting Women while the Male’s

4. mating with Asses, and in the Caves of Khajuraho, one can very evidently
find images of Women erotically embracing other Women and the Males
showing their Genitals to each other, these images cannot just be
considered as perverted fantasies as this was what our Ancestors
practiced and if homosexuality existed somewhere around 6th Century,
then why are we scared enough to adopt it for the better of the People
who are Homosexuals and many Historians concur with it as well so, its
time to tell Institutions like the Vishwa Hindu Parishad the real side of
things and get them out of their El-Dorado and the time has also come to
tell People like Baba Ramdev who say “I can cure Homosexuality by Yoga
and it is a bad addiction” that it was time for a change and also the time
to think for the better of the Society and not just think what concerns the
majority.
Shaashwat Singh
TECH58830