NALSA V. UNION OF INDIA. Transgender docx

NALSA V. UNION OF INDIA

1. FACTS OF NALSA V. UNION OF INDIA
The case deals with transgender people and all those people who do not
conform to either male or female genders. Their rights are often violated
which in turn causes serious trauma and difficulties in their lives. Most of the
times they suffer mental or sexual abuse in public spaces like shopping malls,
railway stations, hospitals, education centres, workplaces and so on. They are
not readily accepted, rather get ridiculed and treated like untouchables, in the
society. In order to throw light upon these various grievances and concerns of
the Transgender Community, The National Legal Services Authority filed a writ
petition to identify this community, which includes Kinnars, Hijras, legally as
the “third gender”. The Constitution of India lacked legal provisions for them
and so they were not able to protect their rights even when their fundamental
rights are supposed to be protected under Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21.
Laxmi Narayan Tripathy, a member of the Hijra community, shares personal
life incidents where Tripathy got prosecuted in the past for putting forth the
same issues for not being legally identified as the third gender and that this
community has been denied equality and equal protection by law. The
following words give an insight to Tripathy’s sufferings- “That the Applicant
has born as a male. Growing up as a child, she felt different from the boys of
her age and was feminine in her ways. On account of her femininity, from an
early age, she faced repeated sexual harassment, molestation and sexual
abuse, both within and outside the family.”[1] The community also gets
discriminated by being outcasted in cultural and social events, during elections
which include the “right to vote”, contesting for elections, getting licences and
employment.
ISSUES RAISED IN NLSA V. UNION OF INDIA
1. Is the non-recognition of Transgender as a gender identity a violation of
their Fundamental Rights?
2. Whether the State should make any provisions for the Transgender?
3. Whether the law provided has given the Transgender Community the
freedom to choose their gender?[2]
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED:
The petitioners argued that only binary genders of male and female were
recognized under Indian law and the lack of legal measures to cater to the
needs of the represented groups contradicted several constitutional rights
including the rights to a dignified life, equality before the law, non-
discrimination and freedom of expression.

2. The Petitioners further argued how the rights of the third gender were being
violated in the case, taking the support of Fundamental Rights provided by the
Constitution.They argued that according to Article 14 (right to equality) of the
Indian Constitution, no person shall be discriminated based on sex, religion,
etc. The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law within the
territory of India. This right is not restricted to male and female which means
that any third gender should be protected by it equally.
It was further argued that Article 19 which guarantees citizens freedom of
speech, form associations or unions, to meet peacefully without any arms, etc.
is also being violated over here and is perhaps one of the most important
rights which is being violated. The violation occurs when the
transgenderpeople are not free to express themselves as it is objected by the
society, sometimes becoming a threat to their lives. This right includes the
right to expression of one’s self-identified gender. This expression may be
done through dress, words, action or behaviour or any other manner.[4]
And finally, Article 21[5]which is the most extensive right guarantees
citizensthe right to personal life and liberty i.e. no person shall be deprived of
his life and personal liberty except by law. Transgenders have every right to
live their life in a dignified and respectful way. It also includes right to live with
human dignity. Expression of oneself with respect to a gender which is self-
recognized is an important part of Article 21.
Along with the Fundamental Rights, the petitioners also argued that there
were many international laws as well which were being violated:
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Yogyakarta Principles, Principles 1 (universal enjoyment of human rights), 2
(rights to equality and non-discrimination), 3 (right to recognition before the
law), 6 (right to privacy), 4 (right to life), 9 (right to treatment with humanity
while in detention), 6 (right to privacy), 18 (protection from medical abuses)
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Articles 31, 32 (Interpretation of
International Conventions) [6]
Given these reasons, transgenders live a tough life andtheir gender identity
would make things easier for them. It would be easier for them to fill forms
and they won’t have any difficulty in choosing between sexes as they would
have a separate gender in the form. They would not have to undergo any
operation to recognize themselves under a particular sex. They would get to
enjoy all the rights which the male and female citizens of the country enjoy.

3. The defendants, on the other hand, argued by saying that the State
Government had set up an “Expert Committee on Issues Relating to
Transgender” and said that the petitioner’s views would be sought as part of
the process. Various states and union territories have also argued that they
have taken significant steps to improve the conditions and status of the
transgender community.
JUDGEMENT: NLSA V. UNION OF INDIA
The court gave its verdict in favour of the petitioners. The decision said that
transgender people have the right to self-identification of their gender and so
they must have the legal provision of identifying themselves as males, females
or the third gender. Eunuchs, Hijras and all of those who do not conform to
the binary gender will be legally identified as the “third gender” and their
fundamental rights will be safeguarded as per the provisions in Part III of the
Indian Constitution. The court also directed the Union and State governments
to take necessary measures regarding the various social, health and
educational issues faced by the transgender people and providing reservation
to them under the category of “socially and educationally backward classes of
citizens”.[7]
The court said that it recognises gender identity and the sexual orientation of
an individual to be a major aspect of his/her personality and dignity.
Therefore, they should not be forced into medical procedures such as
sterilization, sex reassignment surgery (SRS) and so on in order to gain
recognition under law. Article 14 of our Indian Constitution provides equality
and equal protection before the law to all “persons”, where a person might not
necessarily be a male or a female. The term “transgender” has a wide scope as
it covers all those people who do not fit into the binary gender system (Hijras,
Kothis, Eunuchs, Jogtas, Shiv-Shakthis). Article 15, as well as Article 16, of our
Constitution protects the citizens of India from being discriminated based on
certain grounds, one of them being ‘sex’. Article 21 provides the right to live
with dignity and giving a person the choice of identifying his/her own gender
comes under the ambit of this article. In the court’s words, “recognition of
one’s gender identity lies at the heart of the fundamental right to dignity”.[8]
Article 19(1) (a) provides the right to free speech and expression to all the
citizens and so expressingyour own gender through any kind of clothing,
language or demeanour is not against the law.
The judgement in this case stands till date as the law.
CONCLUSION: NLSA V. UNION OF INDIA
The Supreme Court made history on 15th April, 2014 by passing this
judgement. It paved the way for the Transgender Community to enjoy equal
rights and opportunities in India.

4. यह
केस ट्रांसजेंडर लोगों के बारे में है
, म
तलब वो लोग जो
male या

female, दो
नों में से किसी
gender से

match न
हीं करते। इनके
rights अक्सर violate हो
ते हैं
, जि
ससे उनको बहुत परेशानी और
trauma हो
ता है।
ज़्
यादातर
time, public places जै
से
shopping malls, railway stations, hospitals, education
centres, workplaces, etc. में
इनके साथ बुरा व्यवहार होता है
, mental और sexual abuse भी
होता है।
Society में
इनको आसानी से
accept न
हीं किया जाता
, ब
ल्कि इनका मज़ाक उड़ाया जाता है और
untouchables जै
सा
treat कि
या जाता है।
क्
यों हुआ ये केस
?
National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) ने
एक
writ petition file की, जि
समें
Kinnars,
Hijras, etc. को

legally "third gender" के
रूप में पहचानने की बात कही गई।
Indian Constitution में

इ
नके लिए कोई
legal provisions न
हीं थे
, इस
लिए इनके
fundamental rights भी

protect न
हीं हो पा रहे
थे, ज
बकि
Articles 14, 15, 16 और 21 में
सबके
fundamental rights protect क
रने की बात कही गई है।
Laxmi Narayan Tripathy का
दर्द
Laxmi Narayan Tripathy, जो
कि एक
Hijra community member हैं, ने
अपनी
personal life के

incidents share कि
ए। उन्होंने बताया कि उनको
past में
इसलिए
prosecute कि
या गया था क्योंकि वो
इस issue को

raise क
रती थी कि उनको
legally third gender के
रूप में पहचान नहीं मिली है
, और इस
community को

equality और equal protection of law से

deny कि
या गया है। उन्होंने बताया कि वो
male पै
दा हुई थी
, ले
किन बचपन से ही वो अपने
age के

boys से

different feel क
रती थी और
feminine
थी
। इसलिए
, उ
नको बचपन से ही
sexual harassment, molestation और sexual abuse face क
रना
प
ड़ा
, family के
अंदर भी और बाहर भी। इस
community को

cultural और social events में, elections
में

(right to vote, elections contest क
रना
, licences ले
ना
, employment) में
भी
discriminate कि
या
जा
ता है।
Issues क्
या थे
?
1.क्
या
Transgender को
एक
gender identity के
रूप में ना पहचानना उनके
Fundamental
Rights का

violation है?
2.क्
या
State को

Transgender के
लिए कोई
provisions ब
नाने चाहिए
?
3.क्
या
law ने

Transgender Community को
अपना
gender choose क
रने की
freedom दी
है
?
Arguments क्
या थे
?
Petitioners ने
कहा कि
Indian law में
सिर्फ
male और female genders recognize कि
ए जाते हैं
, और
third gender की

needs को
पूरा करने के लिए कोई
legal measures न
हीं हैं
, जो
कि कई
constitutional
rights के
खिलाफ है
, जै
से
right to dignified life, equality before law, non-discrimination और
freedom of expression. उन्
होंने
Article 14 (right to equality), Article 19 (freedom of speech,
etc.) और Article 21 (right to personal life and liberty) का
ज़िक्र किया और बताया कि कैसे ये
rights
Transgender के

case में

violate हो
रहे हैं। उन्होंने
International laws जै
से
ICCPR, Universal
Declaration of Human Rights और Yogyakarta Principles का
भी ज़िक्र किया।

5. Defendants ने
कहा कि
State Government ने

“Expert Committee on Issues Relating to
Transgender” ब
नाई है और
petitioners के

views भी

process का

part हों
गे। कई
states और union
territories ने
भी कहा कि उन्होंने
Transgender community की

conditions और status improve क
रने
के
लिए
steps लि
ए हैं।
Judgment क्
या आया
?
Court ने

petitioners के

favour में

decision दि
या। उन्होंने कहा कि
transgender लो
गों को अपने
gender
को

self-identify क
रने का
right है, और इस
लिए उनके पास
legally male, female या

third gender के

रूप
में
identify क
रने का
provision हो
ना चाहिए।
Eunuchs, Hijras और
जो लोग
binary gender
system में

fit न
हीं होते
, उ
नको
legally "third gender" के
रूप में पहचाना जाएगा और उनके
fundamental rights Indian Constitution के

Part III के

according protect कि
ए जाएंगे।
Court ने

Union और State governments को

transgender लो
गों की
social, health और educational issues के

बा
रे में
necessary measures ले
ने और उनको
“socially and educationally backward classes of
citizens” category में

reservation दे
ने के लिए कहा।
Court ने
कहा कि
gender identity और sexual
orientation ए
क
individual के

personality और dignity का

major aspect है
। इसलिए
, उ
नको
medical
procedures जै
से
sterilization, sex reassignment surgery (SRS) etc. के
लिए
force न
हीं किया जाना
चा
हिए।
Conclusion:
Supreme Court ने

15th April, 2014 को
ये
historic judgement दि
या। इसने
Transgender
Community के
लिए
India में

equal rights और opportunities enjoy क
रने का रास्ता खोल दिया।