KEY FACTS: The Petitioners in this case are a lesbian couple. Both their parents opposed the relationship.The Petitioners fled to Chennai from their respective homes in Madurai because of the fear of getting separated. The parents of the Petitioners filed missing complaints for their respective daughters with the police. The police started interrogating the Petitioners […]
HINA HANEEFA V. STATE OF KERALA
KEY FACTS: The Petitioner, Hina Haneefa, is a trans woman. She had undergone reassignment surgery and got a transgender identity card showing her gender identity as female. She had applied to be a part of the National Cadets Corps (NCC) but was refused admission to the Girls Divisions as she was a transgender person. She […]
CHINMAYEE JENA VS STATE OF ODISHA & OTHERS
KEY FACTS: The petition concerns Sonu Krishna Jena (the name assigned at birth – Chinmayee Jena), a transman who had been in a consensual relationship with his romantic partner Rashmi (original name withheld) since 2017 and chose to be in a live-in relationship together at their apartment in Bhubaneshwar. On 9th April 2020, Rashmi’s mother […]
QUEERALA & ANOTHER VS. STATE OF KERALA & OTHERS
KEY FACTS The government of Kerala passed an order in March 2018 granting special sanction to include the option “transgender” for identification in the Secondary School Leaving Certificate (SSLC). However, the option was only available to transgender persons if they had undergone sex-reassignment surgery (SRS). Queerala, an LGBTIQ rights organisation in Kerala, and Zara Sheikha, a […]
TESSY JAMES VS. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
KEY FACTS: Tessy James is the mother of an adult transgender woman. She filed a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that some members of the transgender community had taken away her “son”. She also argued that her “son” suffered from psychiatric disorders and required evaluation and treatment. ISSUES: The issue before the High Court was whether […]
RANO VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
KEY FACTS: Rano and Rajni Rawat Kinnar were transgender persons who filed separate petitions before the High court of Uttarakhand. The court adjudicated both the cases together as the issues were similar. The petitioners sought protection for their right to life and liberty from the court. ISSUES & DECISION: The issue before the Court was […]
SHIVANI ‘SHIVY’ BHAT VS. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
KEY FACTS: Shivani ‘Shivy’ Bhat was an Indian-origin citizen of the USA. He had grown up in the USA and was pursuing his further studies there. When he was visiting his ancestral home in Uttar Pradesh (UP) with his family, his family confiscated his passport and green-card. Shivy’s family harassed and beat him. They also […]
MIAN AASIA VS. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN
KEY FACTS: Mian Aasia’s Computerized National Identification Card (CNIC) had expired. Their application for a new CNIC was rejected because they had filled out their guru’s name in the place allocated for their biological father’s name. Mian Aasia challenged this decision before the Lahore High Court. ISSUES AND DECISION: Mian Aasia argued that the CNIC card should […]
DR. MUHAMMAD ASLAM KHAKI VS. S.S.P, RAWALPINDI
KEY FACTS: Dr Mohammad Aslam Khaki, an Islamic scholar, filed a case on behalf of the transgender community. Khaki argued for legal recognition and equal treatment of transgender persons, under the Constitution of Pakistan. ISSUES: The Constitution of Pakistan recognises the right to equal treatment of all citizens. It allows public authorities to make provisions […]
RAJANI SHAHI VS. NATIONAL WOMEN COMMISSION
KEY FACTS: Rajani Shahi was in a heterosexual marriage with Pradip Shahi. She came out as a lesbian to her husband. She filed a divorce against her husband to live with her partner, Ms. Nepali. Her husband then abducted her and forced her to live with him. Rajani approached the National Women Commission (NWC) to […]
SUNIL BABU PANT VS. NEPAL GOVERNMENT
KEY FACTS: Representatives of the LGBTI community filed a case against the Government of Nepal for excluding gender and sexual minorities. They claimed that gender minorities lacked access to public benefits because they could not obtain citizenship cards on the basis of non-binary gender identity. They argued for legal recognition of LGBTI persons. ISSUES: The […]
JUSTICE K.S. PUTTASWAMY VS. UNION OF INDIA
KEY FACTS: Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.), a retired judge of the Madras High Court, challenged the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar scheme. He argued that the scheme violated the right to privacy. A three-judge bench held that a larger bench should determine whether the Constitution of India guarantees a right to privacy. A nine-judge bench decided […]
ASHISH KUMAR MISRA VS. BHARAT SARKAR
KEY FACTS: A public interest petition was filed regarding food security of transgender persons under The National Food Security Act, 2013 (NFSA). Section 13 of the NFSA deals with who is considered the “head of the household”. The section is gender-specific. It mandates that the head of the household must be the eldest female, or in […]
NAVTEJ SINGH JOHAR VS. UNION OF INDIA
KEY FACTS: Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) criminalised consensual sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex for being “against the order of nature”. In 2009, before the Delhi High Court, the Naz Foundation (India) Trust (“Naz”) challenged the constitutionality of Section 377 for violating Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The court ruled that punishing […]
KARNATAKA SEXUAL MINORITIES FORUM VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA
KEY FACTS: The Karnataka Police Act,1963 included a section targeting transgender persons. Section 36A gave the Commissioner of Police the power to prevent, suppress, or control “undesirable activities of eunuchs”. It also allowed the tracking of a “eunuch” who was suspected of committing “unnatural offences” or “kidnapping and emasculating boys”. The Karnataka Sexual Minorities Forum (KSMF), […]
S. THARIKA BANU VS. HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT
KEY FACTS: Tharika Banu applied for an undergraduate degree at Siddha Medicine and Surgery (BSMS). She had applied under the Scheduled Caste (SC) and transgender category. However, Tharika’s admission core fell under the qualificatory score of 50% by a small margin. Consequently, Tharika did not qualify for BSMS’ merit list and her application was rejected. ISSUES […]
JAYALAKSHMI VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU
KEY FACTS: A transgender woman, Pandian was routinely interrogated by the police for her alleged involvement in a case of theft over a period of one month. As per her bail conditions she was required to report at the Vyasarpadi Police Station every day at 10:00 am. Despite this, a police officer would pick up […]
SHIVAM SANTOSH DEWANGAN VS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
KEY FACTS: This was a case of rape against a transgender woman. Shivam Dewangan extorted a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 from a transgender woman and engaged in sexual acts under the false pretext of marriage. He filed this petition to be released on regular bail. ISSUES & DECISION: The issue before the court was whether […]
SWEETY VS. GENERAL PUBLIC
KEY FACTS: This case dealt with the question of succession for “eunuchs” (sic) who are part of the Guru-Chela system. Sweety, a guru, filed a case in the lower courts to claim the property of her chela, Rajia, who had died. In this case, the lower court held that the mode of succession was governed by The […]
SUMITA KUMARI VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
KEY FACTS: Sumita Kumari applied to be an ASHA Karmee/social worker. Sumita was a transgender woman who was unable to specify her gender as male or female. ASHA Karmee rejected her application for employment. She approached the court to argue against the prejudice she faced in the process of application. ISSUES AND DECISION: The Court considered whether […]
THE CHAIRMAN VS. ARADHANA
KEY FACTS: Aradhana, a transgender woman, filed a petition before High Court of Madras against an advertisement inviting applications for the post of Grade II constable. She argued that the advertisement did not allow a relaxation in the age limit of applications submitted by transgender persons. A single judge had passed an interim order, directing the Chairman of […]
SANGEETA HIJRA VS. STATE OF BIHAR
KEY FACTS: Sangeeta Hijra, a transgender woman filed her nomination for ‘female unreserved’ seat to contest the Patna Municipal election in 2017. The Deputy Development Commissioner of Patna (the “commissioner”) issued an order rejecting her nomination. The order stated that Sangeeta Hijra was not eligible for the ‘female unreserved’ seat because she is a transgender person. […]
GANGA KUMARI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
KEY FACTS: Ganga Kumari had applied for the post of a woman police constable. She was qualified and successfully cleared the written examination, physical efficiency tests and also underwent a medical examination. Despite being selected for the post, she was denied an appointment letter because the medical report termed her a “hermaphrodite”. After repeated unanswered […]
NANGAI-III VS. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU
KEY FACTS: Nangai-III was selected for the post of grade II woman police constable. Before her deputation, the recruitment board (“the board”) asked her to undergo a medical examination. The examination revealed the absence of uterus in her body. Based on the medical examination report, “the board” declared Nangai-III as a transgender person and revoked […]
S. SWAPNA VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU
KEY FACTS: Swapna, a transgender woman applied for fresh SSLC and HSC certificates indicating her new name and gender identity. The Joint Director of School Examination (JDSE), Tamil Nadu refused to provide them to her. The JDSE stated that the current rules do not allow such name and sex changes. She had submitted her medical […]
POOJITHA B.P. VS. KARNATAKA SECONDARY EDUCATION EXAMINATION BOARD
KEY FACTS: Poojitha is a transgender woman who wanted to change her name and gender in her educational record. She had obtained fresh identity documents, such as an Aadhar card and a passport, indicating her name and gender after undergoing sex-reassignment surgery. Even after 3 months, the Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board (hereafter: the “Board”) […]
SHRI VINOD H.N VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA
KEY FACTS: Vinod H.N., the petitioner was born intersex. In his birth documents, this was listed as a medical condition called “severe perianal hypospadasis(intersex variation). Vinod identified as male and wanted to change his name to Vinod H.N. in all important documents. He filed a writ petition before High Court seeking a name change. He […]
NATIONAL LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY (NALSA) VS. UNION OF INDIA
KEY FACTS: This case was filed by the National Legal Services Authority of India (NALSA) to legally recognize persons who fall outside the male/female gender binary, including persons who identify as “third gender”. ISSUES & DECISION: The Court had to decide whether persons who fall outside the male/female gender binary can be legally recognised as […]
CHANCHAL BHATTACHARYA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
KEY FACTS: Tamal identified as male but had been assigned female at birth. He had struggled with gender dysphoria and, on the basis of multiple medical consultations, had decided to undergo sex-reassignment surgery. Tamal declared his name change before a magistrate after the surgery. His father then applied for new educational certificates which would reflect the change in […]