Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
[2018] 7 SCR 379 · Supreme Court of India · Decision date: 2018-09-06
Key issue
Can section 377 constitutionally criminalise consensual sexual conduct between adults in private?
Facts
Petitioners challenged the criminalisation of consensual adult same-sex intimacy under section 377 IPC. Case number: W.P. (Crl.) 76/2016 and connected matters
Holding
Unanimously, section 377 was unconstitutional insofar as it criminalised consensual sexual conduct between adults in private. Constitutional morality and fundamental rights protect sexual orientation and intimate choice against majoritarian prejudice. Section 377 was read down and Suresh Kumar Koushal overruled. Under the law then considered, the provision remained applicable to nonconsensual acts, minors and bestiality. Four concurring opinions: Misra for himself and Khanwilkar; separate opinions by Nariman, Chandrachud and Malhotra. Provisions considered at judgment date: Constitution: Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21; Indian Penal Code 1860, section 377.
Pinpoints
PDF p. 494 — Malhotra: operative scope and pending cases; PDF p. 495 — Disposition. PDF page numbers are 1-based and may differ from printed reporter pages.
Verification status
Source checked
Source note
Original TLG research note based on the linked official judgment, not an official court summary. Source identity and selected holding passages checked on 4 November 2026.
Current treatment
Supriyo (17 October 2023) separately addresses marriage recognition. The original section 377 framework must not be presented as a complete account of current criminal statutes; that statutory update is outside this entry's completed checks. Historical case note; exhaustive subsequent treatment and current statutory application have not been checked.