Overview
The Delhi High Court on 20 March 2026 ordered the revival of a PIL filed by Gantavya Gulati. The petition seeks a specific criminal provision for non‑consensual "unnatural" sexual acts, similar to the erstwhile Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.
Key Developments
- The bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia restored the petition after it had been disposed of in August 2024 with a direction to the Centre for a decision.
- The court highlighted a "legal lacuna" in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which lacks a provision equivalent to Section 377.
- The petition argues that the absence of such a provision leaves the LGBTQ community and other victims without a specific criminal remedy for certain sexual assaults.
- The court has asked the Centre to file an affidavit detailing steps taken to comply with the earlier direction dated 28 August 2024.
- The central government counsel described the issue as "sensitive" and indicated that stakeholder inputs are being sought.
Important Facts
• The Supreme Court decriminalised consensual same‑sex relations in 2018, but Section 377 continues to apply to non‑consensual acts, offences involving minors, and bestiality.
• The BNS came into force on 1 July 2024, replacing the Indian Penal Code after a comprehensive legislative overhaul.
• The petitioner contends that the current gap also affects cases where a man is allegedly sexually assaulted by another man, underscoring the need for gender‑neutral protection.
Exam Relevance
Understanding this development is crucial for GS 2 (Polity) and GS 1 (Society & Social Justice). It illustrates the interaction between the judiciary and legislative reforms, highlights the challenges of ensuring inclusive criminal law, and reflects the evolving discourse on LGBTQ rights in India. Aspirants should note the procedural aspect of PILs, the role of High Courts in monitoring executive compliance, and the importance of statutory gaps in policy analysis.
Way Forward
- Legislative: Amend the BNS to incorporate a clause criminalising non‑consensual "unnatural" sexual acts, ensuring gender‑neutral language.
- Executive: The Centre should promptly submit the required affidavit and consider stakeholder recommendations, including inputs from LGBTQ advocacy groups.
- Judicial: Continued monitoring by the High Court and possible intervention by the Supreme Court if the legislative response is inadequate.
- Societal: Awareness campaigns to educate vulnerable communities about legal recourse and to sensitize law‑enforcement agencies.