Love and law

In July last year,the Delhi high court made a dramatic decision,reversing a century and a half of a homosexual-hating law,when it read down Section 377,limiting a broad set of unnatural offences to only forcible sexual intercourse and paedophilia. Section 377 was a blunt instrument of repression meant to stamp out carnal intercourse against the order of nature. Instead of a precise and pointed law to take on child sexual abuse,for instance,Indian authorities relied on this section,in which rape,bestiality and consensual sex between adults were judged equally. As it stands,the law leaves women and children vulnerable and legally underserved,while allowing queer citizens to be harassed and forced to live in secrecy. It was used to systematically persecute sexual minorities,and push important public health issues like HIV prevention under the carpet.

The high courts reading down of Section 377 was a much-needed blow,and an effort to unpack these contentious categories. The government itself was riven over the issue,speaking in different voices. The home ministry argued that excising the section would open the floodgates of delinquent behaviour,but the health ministry took a public health stand,pointing to the danger of criminalising homosexuality.

This time round,the shift is perceptible. To secure the Delhi high court victory,the home ministry is now quietly moving on amending the Indian Penal Code,diluting Section 377 to decriminalise homosexuality. It has asked the law ministry to craft a rough amendment bill,which will then be circulated among state governments for comments and intervention. Meaning that even while individuals and NGOs challenge the 377 ruling in the Supreme Court the case is still pending,a parliamentary amendment could protect gay rights if it makes it past the House. It will change the governments default setting to one that defends sexual freedom.