CASE COMMENTARY: NAVTEJ SINGH JOHAR V. UNION OF INDIA (2018)

The decision in Navtej Singh Johar V. Union of India is one of the most transformative constitutional judgments delivered by the Supreme Court of India. The case challenged the constitutional validity of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, a colonial-era provision that criminalised “carnal intercourse against the order of nature.” For decades, the provision had been used to stigmatise and marginalise members of the LGBTQ+ community despite limited prosecutions. The Constitution Bench judgment delivered on 6 September 2018 marked a significant shift in Indian constitutional jurisprudence by affirming dignity, equality, privacy, and individual autonomy as central constitutional values.1The Court recognised that constitutional morality must prevail over social morality and held that consensual sexual relations between adults could not be subjected to criminal sanctions merely because they differed from majoritarian norms.