S. SUSHMA AND ORS. VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, GREATER CHENNAI POLICE AND ORS.

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 […]

Read more

ANJALI GURU SANJANA JAAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

KEY FACTS: The Petitioner, Anjali Guru Sanjana Jaan, is a trans woman. She submitted her nomination form to contest for a village panchayat seat from a ward reserved for women-general category. The Returning Officer rejected her nomination because she was transgender. It was stated that there was no ward reserved for transgender persons in the […]

Read more

PALLABI CHAKRABORTY VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

KEY FACTS: The Petitioner in this case was assigned male at birth. Later, by a sworn affidavit before the Judicial Magistrate, they identified themselves as a transgender person. However, they had obtained employment with the State Police as a ‘lady’ with the name Pallabi Chakraborty. This happened after the enactment of the Transgender Persons (Protection […]

Read more

MS. X VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

KEY FACTS: The Petitioner is a trans person who identified as female. She was repeatedly raped and blackmailed by the accused. She lodged an FIR against the accused under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), which criminalises the rape of a woman. During the investigation, she made it clear that she identified […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

MX. SUMANA PRAMANIK V. UNION OF INDIA

KEY FACTS: The petitioner applied to the Court to grant reservations for transgender people in the Joint CSIR-UGC NET. This examination is required to receive a Junior Research Fellowship which is necessary to receive an M.Phil. or Ph.D. in various subjects. The petitioner also requested that reservations, age relaxations and fee concessions be granted for […]

Read more

KARAN TRIPATHI V. NCRB

KEY FACTS: The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) publishes an annual Prison Statistics India (PSI) report in which the composition of the prisoners is released. One of these categories is that of gender which only classifies on the heteronormative male/female basis. The Petitioner, Karan Tripathi, approached the Delhi High Court to include a third category […]

Read more

POONAM RANI v. STATE OF UP

KEY FACTS: The petitioners, aged 21 and 22, were in a live-in relationship for a few years in the state of Uttar Pradesh. They faced opposition from there families who were threatening to use coercive measures. They sought civil protection from their families to continue living peacefully. ISSUES AND DECISION: The issue before the court […]

Read more

SWAPNA & ORS. v. CHIEF SECRETARY & ORS.

KEY FACTS: Swapna, Grace, Selvi, Living Smile Vidya & Selvam filed a petition for reservation in employment and education. This petition directed the respondents to permit transgender persons to appear in all examination under the category of female and transman under the category of male and create a separate class or group for Transgender people […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

KABEER C ALIAS ANEERA KABEER v. STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

KEY FACTS: A Public Interest Litigation was filed in the Kerala High Court by Aneera Kabeer, a trans activist seeking various reliefs relating to transgender people during the period of COVID-19 threat. The writ petition sought for measures by the state government for “the distribution of food ration, medicines, access to medical treatment, etc. to […]

Read more

Mx. ALIA SK V. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

KEY FACTS: The petitioner, Mx Alia is a transgender person with a transgender certificate from the Judicial Magistrate, Alipore. The respondent, West Bengal University of Health Sciences issued a notification inviting applications for an M.Phil in Clinical Psychology. However, the application form did not have Third Gender or Transgender Category to apply in. The petitioner […]

Read more

MYRA GRACE BANDIKALLA V. AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ORS.

KEY FACTS: The petitioner is Myra Grace Bandikalla, a transwoman from Andhra Pradesh. She came to Mumbai in 2010 and since has been working as an Air Traffic Controller for the Airport Authority of India, the respondents in this case. Having been medically diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria, Myra has self-identified as female for many years. […]

Read more

MANSUR RAHMAN VS. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE & ANR.

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 […]

Read more

ARUNKUMAR & OTHER VS. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION & OTHERS

KEY FACTS: Arunkumar got married to Sreeja, a transwoman, on 31 October 2018 at a temple in Tuticorin, as per Hindu rites and customs. When they submitted a memorandum for registration of marriage to the Joint Registrar No. II of Tuticorin, the Registrar refused to register the same. The petitioners challenged this decision before the […]

Read more

JEEVA M. VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

KEY FACTS: The Petitioner was a transgender person who wanted to change his name and gender from female to male in his educational certificates, specifically his SSLC and Pre-University certificate. He had made representations to the Respondents requesting them to change his name and gender in his educational certificates but the Respondents refused to take […]

Read more

JACKULINE MARY VS. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KARUR

KEY FACTS: The state police force recruited Jackuline Mary for the post of a ‘woman police constable’. During the initial medical examination after selection, the medical officer recorder her gender as “transgender”. The subsequent medical reports also noted that “she is transgender by birth“. Consequently, the State terminated her appointment on the ground that she concealed […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR KAPPU VS. PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, DELHI POLICE

KEY FACTS Santosh Kumar, the petitioner filed an application under Right To Information Act, 2005 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of Delhi Police Head Quarters (PHQ). He requested the following information: Whether transgender persons’ begging in public places with or without misconduct is a cognizable offence or not. How many First Information Reports (FIRs) […]

Read more

RESHMA PRASAD @ RAMESH PRASAD VS. UNION OF INDIA

KEY FACTS: Reshma Prasad filed a petition before the Patna High Court seeking the monitoring and implementation of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in NALSA v. Union of India. ISSUES AND DECISION: Reshma Prasad argued that the state had failed to establish integrated counselling and testing centres. This was one of the […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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), […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

PINKI PRAMANIK VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

KEY FACTS: Pinki Pramanik was a national-level female athlete who had been cohabiting with a friend of hers whose husband had abandoned her. After 3 years of living together, the woman brought a complaint of sexual assault and rape against Pinki for inducing her into sexual activity on the pretext of marriage and exploiting her […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

MANJU VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

KEY FACTS:  Manju, a transgender woman, applied for the post of a police constable. Manju passed the written test and most activities in the physical test. However, she did not complete the 100-meter sprint within the required time limit. The Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services-Recruitment Board disqualified her. She approached the High Court challenging her disqualification. ISSUES:  The Court had […]

Read more

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. […]

Read more

K. PRITHIKA YASHINI VS. CHAIRMAN, TAMIL NADU UNIFORMED SERVICES RECRUITMENT BOARD

KEY FACTS: K. Prithika Yashini was a transgender woman who applied for the post of Sub-Inspector. The selection process consisted of three steps: a written test, physical test and viva voce (oral examination). Despite the Supreme Court judgment in NALSA v Union of India, the application form for the selection did not account for “third gender” applicants. Prithika approached […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

ATRI KAR VS. UNION OF INDIA

KEY FACTS:  Atri Kar was a transgender person who wished to participate in the selection process conducted by the State Bank of India (“SBI”) to recruit Probationary Officers. However, the application form did not contain a gender column for transgender applicants. The petitioner made a representation to SBI. It did not elicit any response. The […]

Read more

FAIZAN SIDDIQUI VS. SASHASTRA SEEMA BAL

KEY FACTS:  Faizan Siddiqui, the petitioner, was diagnosed with a congenital anomaly named Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome and a Disorder of Sexual Differentiation (DSD). This meant that despite being born male, her body was not responsive to male hormones. Hence, she identified as female. She underwent surgery at a young age to remove her testes, followed […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

NANGAI-II VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

KEY FACTS: Nangai-II (name changed) was assigned female at birth. She was selected for the post of a woman police constable. She went through a medical check-up which included a gender test during her training. The results declared her as a “Pseudo-Hermaphrodite” or “transsexual”. Consequently, the Vice Principal of the Police Recruitment School asked her […]

Read more

NANGAI VS. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

KEY FACTS: Nangai (name changed) was assigned and registered as female at birth. Nangai’s documents, including her birth certificate, medical records, family card and census data to the records at the all-girls’ school and women’s college she attended, all identify her as female. In 2009, she appeared for the selection process of Grade II Police […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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”) […]

Read more

N.D. VISHNU PRIYA VS. DIRECTORATE OF SCHOOL EDUCATION

KEY FACTS:  Vishnu Priya is a transgender woman who applied for changes in her identity documents after undergoing sex-reassignment surgery. She wanted her gender and name to be changed in her passport and educational certificates. She filed this case for such directions to the concerned Government authorities. ISSUES & DECISION:  The Court considered Vishnu Priya’s […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

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 […]

Read more

K. GOWTHAM SUBRAMANIYAM VS. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION, ANNA UNIVERSITY

KEY FACTS:  Gowtham was assigned female at birth. His educational certificates reflected the name and gender as assigned at birth. After graduating from Anna University in Tamil Nadu, Gowtham underwent sex-reassignment surgery. Consequently, he changed his identity in identity documents. He then approached Anna University to have his name and gender changed on his educational […]

Read more

MULLA FAIZAL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT

KEY FACTS: Mulla Faizal was assigned and recorded as female at birth despite having intersex characteristics. As an adult, he had naturally developed more male characteristics and obtained medical and psychological certificates confirming his gender as male. Additionally, Mulla Faizal also underwent surgical procedures to align himself with the male gender. Consequently, when he approached […]

Read more