Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code criminalizes consensual non-vaginal sexual acts, impacting LGBTQ+ individuals and reflecting societal double standards regarding sexuality in India. Despite a 2009 Delhi High Court ruling decriminalizing these acts, the Supreme Court later upheld the law, reinforcing the marginalization of LGBTQ+ communities and perpetuating fear of prosecution. The socio-political discourse around Section 377 highlights the need for greater inclusivity and respect for personal freedoms within Indian society.

1. Section 377
“Langotiya yaar” may not have the same friendly connotation anymore.
Section 377 concerns ‘Unnatural offences’ and is a section of 2 sentences
in the Indian Penal Code, which came into force in 1862. The Constitution
of India came into effect in 1950, and the 80 year old IPC was
incorporated into it without changes. Many amendments have been
made in the IPC since then, but 377 remains as it was. Even though the
United Kingdom and Ireland themselves have decriminalised
homosexuality decades ago. Section 377 declares those “consenting
adults” who have “intercourse against the order of nature” as criminals.
Intercourse against the order of nature entails any penile non-vaginal
insertion between consenting adults and/or animals. Everything in
private, ofcourse. Basically any act, which doesn’t lead to reproduction, is
criminal, even if done by consenting adults in a personal space. Even
mutual masturbation, between males and/or females.
The context in which 377 has become important is the implications it has
on bisexuals, gays, lesbians and transgendered people, and some recent

2. critical court judgments, all brought into public attention by activists and
the media. The movement to fight against criminalisation, however, is
older. Sporadic underground newsletters preceded the first public
movement which was in the form of protests by the Siddharth Gautam
led AIDS Bhedbhav Virodhi Andolan, and the original court case against
377, in the 1990s. Their historic publication called “Less than Gay” put the
issue in the perspective of violation of human rights, and discrimination.
There is some literature on the same theme – “Lihaaf” by Ismat Chugtai
written, ironically, in 1940s Pakistan, has been loosely weaved into the
new Hindi movie “Dedh Ishqiya”. It is about a woman, who is ignored in
marriage by a homosexual husband, and finds comfort in another
woman’s love.
The socio-political discussion in India about sexuality is an incoherent
noise, because everyone has an ‘opinion’, and everyone thinks they are
‘right’. And the same people might hypocritically accept behaviour which
is totally contrary to their ‘morals’. It is frowned upon when heterosexual
couples hold hands in public places in many big and small towns, but it is
acceptable for young men to hold hands, or walk with their hands around
each others’ waists, in general. The issue around 377 is obviously larger,
relating to the inherent double standards regarding sex in India. We might
abuse our wives and then blackmail the family, rape little girls (or boys),
have awkward silences with our teenage children when a condom
advertisement is on television, marry-off minor girls to their maternal
uncles, even hesitate in saying ‘sex’ loudly, but we Indians are obviously
having a lot of sex, if our population of 1.3 billion could be any
explanation. 377 is a British law, and not one which was included in the
IPC because of Indian cultural traditions. Thus many right wing political
leaders and loud common people are wrong when they say that 377
arises out of Indian culture. Tolerance and inclusiveness are two of the
basic tenets of Hinduism, the largest religion in India. Apart from the
Kamasutra and the Khajuraho sculptures, there are many other examples
of this acceptance. The Konark temple depicts mutual fellatio and orgy-

3. like scenes, God Ardhanarishwar and the ling are representations of the
perfect communion of the female and male forms, beyond sexuality. The
dual-gendered God Ayyappa is worshipped by the hijras. Though
homosexuals and trangenders may not have been liked in society, they
were never criminals, as they are now. Other religions like Buddhism also
have similar examples.
What is very hard to understand is how much Indians, from the common
man to the political class, make it their business to think about, discuss,
and try to dictate, other people’s personal lives. It seems unbelievable
that gays or lesbians would spend so much of their own time thinking
only about their sexual orientation. They have professional and personal
ambitions of their own – their daily bread to earn. If Section 377 is
upheld, then they are criminals who could be sent to jail for upto 10
years. Just because of who they are. If they live their private lives
according to their wants, they are committing a crime. It is as if their life is
defined by, and ends at, being gay. How then can they be expected to be
contributing members of society, if they live in constant fear? There are
closet homosexuals, who know that they are not attracted to the
opposite sex, who enter a heterosexual marriage unwillingly, and in the
process, potentially traumatise even their spouses, throughout their lives.
AIDS control programs are negatively affected because gays would not
volunteer for tests, and go underground. And this is not only an educated
middle-class construct – there have been instances like the ostracised
marriage of 2 women constables in Bhopal (1987-88) – homosexuals
aren’t just people bored with the opposite gender.
The Delhi High Court’s 2009 judgment struck down Section 377 saying
that it was in violation of Article 21 (Right to Protection of Life and
Personal Liberty), Article 14 (Right to Equality before Law) and Article 15
(Prohibition of Discrimination on Grounds of Religion, Race, Caste, Sex or
Place of Birth) of the Constitution, and decriminalised private sexual acts
between consenting adults. The Supreme Court in December 2013 just

4. indicated that it was not the Judiciary’s business to change a Law, and it
was in fact the prerogative of the Legislature. Though there have been
other similar amendments by courts which have not been reverted.
Practically, there are other comprehensive laws governing child abuse,
rape and sodomy (all supposedly being incorporated in 377), which makes
377 redundant. In principle, the Indian Constitution is, at its core,
Inclusive, and those who are ‘different’, however few they maybe, are
treated equally. Section 377 may just be one issue affecting a fraction of
India, but how we tackle it, as a people, and as a government, is very
important in growing as a cohesive, tolerant society.
- Soham Adla