Facts:
The case originated from an incident involving the second respondent, a transwoman
named Neka, who was abused by the Petitioner, and she had filed a complaint under
the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 and under the IPC.
The Accused filed a petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code on the
ground that the Act should not apply because Neka is a transgender person.
Court Decision and Reasoning:
The Court referenced the Supreme Court’s decision in the NALSA and Arunkumar
Srija v. Inspector General of Registration affirming the right to self-determination of
transgender persons. It therefore ruled that the petition could not be quashed as it
could not be said that the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002
would not be applicable in the present case in view of Neka’s self-determined gender
identity as a woman and thus refused to quash the FIR.
Significance:
This is an important case where the Court addressed a gap in the laws on sexual
harassment as these are gender-specific laws framed with a binary understanding of
gender identity being limited to male and female. The Court thus addressed the
limitation of the law by upholding the right to self-determination and ruling that the
application of sexual harassment laws must extend to anyone who identifies as a
woman and not be limited to cis-gender women.