By IANS,
New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday refused to suspend a Delhi High Court ruling decriminalising consensual homosexuality in private between two adults, maintaining that the ruling has no “penal consequences” and also does not approve of adultery or incestuous sex as is being feared.
A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justice P. Sathasivam refused to suspend the high court verdict after Attorney General Goolam E. Vahanvati indicated lack of keenness by the government in seeking a stay on the ruling.
“There are three ministries involved in the matter. We need some more time to formulate our view,” said Vahanvati, also indicating that the government was not keen on having the verdict suspended.
“We don’t exactly want a stay,” said Vahanvati.
Following the top government law officer’s submission, the court said, “We are not staying the ruling as it does not have any penal consequences. We would have considered stay had there been any penal consequences.” The bench then adjourned the hearing in the case for eight weeks.
The apex court earlier on July 9 had issued notice to the government and sought its stand by July 20. With the government failing to submit its reply by Monday and seeking more time, the bench adjourned the case for two months.
The apex court was hearing a bunch of lawsuits both supporting and opposing the high court’s July 2 verdict, which decriminalised consensual gay sex and partly scrapped the penal provisions under section 377 of the Indian Penal Code of the British era vintage.
Earlier, opposing the high court ruling and seeking an outright stay on it, counsel Praveen Agrawal for Pundit Suresh Kaushal argued that “the judgement has perilous implications for the society”.
He said “the judgement paves the way for man-to-man prostitution and woman-to-woman prostitution, while the man-to-woman prostitution continues to be illegal”.
He apprehended that “the judgement may encourage incestuous relations and adultery”.
The bench, however, allayed his fears, saying the judgement “does not permit incestuous or adulterous relations”.
At one point, senior counsel Anil B. Divan, supporting the high court’s verdict and opposing the fervent pleas by various parties to suspend it, contended that it is in line with the policies of both the union health ministry and the World Health Organisation.
He said that several European, western and African countries have legalized homosexuality.
This led the Chief Justice to observe, “Indian civilisation is not what western civilization is. There is vast difference.”
This led Divan to retort, “Indian civilization is also that of Khajuraho and Kamasutra.”