KEY FACTS:
The Petitioner was in love with Janifer, a transgender woman and married her on 25 July 2018. The Petitioner’s parents and persons belonging to a political outfit were harassing the petitioner and threatening him because of his marriage to a transgender person. Thus the petitioner was seeking police protection.
ISSUE:
The primary issue before the Court was whether ‘police protection’ for couples should include couples consisting of transgender persons.
DECISION:
The Court appreciated the petitioner for marrying a transgender person. Moreover, the Court relied on the landmark Supreme Court judgment in Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr[1]. which noted that the instrumentalities of the State should encourage inter-caste and inter-religious marriage and give such couples sufficient police protection. The Court believed that the Lata Singh precedent must not only be applicable to inter-caste/inter-religious couples but also couples comprising of transgender persons.
The Court directed the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondent seeking protection. Once such representation was submitted, the Court directed the respondent to conduct enquiry and provide protection to the couple.
SIGNIFICANCE:
The Court affirmed the marriage of the petitioner with Ms Janifer and extended the application of Lata Singh case to couples consisting of transgender persons. This way the Court has sought to give police protection to couples facing harassment and intimidation from families for marrying a person outside the ‘socially acceptable’ binary gender identity.
[1] [(2006) 5 SCC 475]