Section 377 hearing: Live Updates from the Supreme Court [Read Mukul Rohatgi, Arvind Datar Notes]

#Section377: Historic hearing commences in Supreme Court of India today at 11.30 am before a Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Rohinton Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra.

Track @barandbench for live updates.

— Murali Krishnan (@legaljournalist) July 10, 2018

Advocate Manoj George seeks listing of curative petition along with the current writ petitions.

Sr. Adv. Mukul Rohatgi opposes – scope is different, Bench is different, says Rohatgi. #Section377 #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377 : “Ramifications of this case is not just on sexuality, it will have impact on how society looks at these people, about perception, about livelihood and jobs for such people”, Mukul Rohatgi #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377 : “My argument is Suresh Kumar Kaushal is wrong; I will take you through Naz Foundation judgment of Delhi High Court, NALSA judgment of SC and Privacy judgment of SC”, Mukul Rohatgi. #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Mukul Rohatgi says his case is made out strongly by Privacy judgment of Supreme Court. Aside from the Indian judgments, he will also place reliance on certain US precedents. #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: “The issue of sexual orientation and gender are different; this case deals only with sexual orientation and has nothing to do with gender;

We are saying that this is not a matter of choice but it is something innate and we are born with it”, Rohatgi#SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: “It uses the word “order of nature”; What is this order? It is the Victorian morals of 1860s”, Mukul Rohatgi. #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377 : “Our order is much older”, says Rohatgi and points to Shikhandi in Mahabharata.

“This order itself is natural, is that your point?”, Justice Rohinton Nariman.

“Yes”, Rohatgi. #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Whether a pre-constitutional law not framed by our Parliament and which does not recognise the needs of our people remain, asks Rohatgi. #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: “The effect of S. 377 in our country is mostly on men though it appears sex-neutral”, Mukul Rohatgi. #SupremeCourt #LGBT

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: “As society changes, values change; What is moral 160 years ago might not be moral today”, Mukul Rohatgi. #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: “Mukul Rohatgi now explaining the provision; Even any sexual intercourse which is not vaginal-penal is hit by this provision”, Rohatgi. #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Mukul Rohatgi now dealing with Naz Foundation judgment of Delhi High Court.

“It is a well researched judgment by the then Chief Justice” #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: “Union of India did not file an appeal against the Delhi Hjudgment”, Mukul Rohatgi.

ASG Tushar Mehta says “our stand is yet to be made”.

“Thats alright. What I am saying os their stand is clear daylight since they also filed a review against SC judgment”, Rohatgi.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Rohatgi now referring to Maneka Gandhi, Kharak Singh, MP Sharma, Lawrence v. Texas. #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: “We are not talking about gender, gay men and gay women don’t call themselves something else, the issue is of orientation”, Rohatgi.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Question arises on legal status of same sex relationships and such couples.

ASG Tushar Mehta says hearing should be confined to Section 377 alone.

“Who are you to say what we should confine ourselves to”, retorts Rohatgi. #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: “In such a case we should be allowed to file our response”, ASG Tushar Mehta.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: ” Do not restrict it to S. 377, further directions are needed for protection of my life, property”, Rohatgi.

“First let us get out of this mess of Naz Foundation/ Kaushal”, CJI Dipak Misra.

“That is easy for me”, says Rohatgi amidst peals of laughter.#LGBT

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Bench convinces Rohatgi to argue on Section 377 alone for now. #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Bench rises for lunch. Will be back post 2 pm. #LGBT

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Constitution Bench reassembles; hearing resumes. #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Senior Advocate Arvind Datar begins his arguments for the petitioner. #LGBT

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Datar tracing history of how laws relating to homosexuality have changed across the world. #LGBT

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: 1860 Code was simply imposed on India and it did not represent even the will of the British Parliament, Arvind Datar. #LGBT

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Justice Chandrachud quizzing Datar on the impact of President’s adaptation orders on the Constitutionality of laws. #LGBT

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: “Is there any judgment of this court that pre-independence laws will not have benefit of presumption of Constitutionality”, CJI Dipak Misra.

“No no”, says Datar. #LGBT

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Datar explaining scope of Article 13.

CJI Dipak Misra and Rohinton Nariman J. in discussion.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Chandrachud J. says Courts might not have same deference for pre-constitutional laws which they have for post-constitutional laws, due to absence of Parliamentary will. #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: The fact that Union of India did not choose to appeal against Delhi HC judgment is all the more reason for it to be struck down. #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Section 377 criminalises a class of people; to say that it criminalises an act and not a class of people is not correct. #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Justice Chandrachud says section 377 applies even to anal sex between man and woman, since it applies to any intercourse that is not penal-vaginal; in that respect strict classification is not there. #LGBT #SupremeCourt

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: The object of penal code is to identify an offence and punish for the same so that it acts as a deterrant. But when it is a natural orientation, then how can it be an offence”, asks Datar.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Regarding Article 21, Datar argues that Puttuswamy judgment says privacy encompasses decisional autonomy. It is a natural corollary that sexual orientation is also covered by that.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Arvind Datar now referring to case laws from various jurisdictions.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Datar placing reliance on a judgment from Trinidad and Tobago.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Datar cites the case of Jason Jones v. Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago which had relied on Puttaswamy judgment of Indian Supreme Court to strike down laws criminalising consensual sex between men.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Arvind Datar concludes, Saurav Kirpal begins submissions.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018

#Section377: Hearing concludes for the day.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 10, 2018