Madras HC takes landmark steps to end prejudice against LGBTQ; bans 'conversion therapy'

Marking a positive tilt of sensitisation towards the LGBTQ community in India, the Madras High Court on Monday banned medical attempts to cure or attempt to change the sexual orientation of persons, in a bid to remove the prejudices against the LGBTQIA+ community. Hearing the plea by a lesbian couple seeking protection from their relatives, the High Court suggested comprehensive measures to be adopted to ensure that the LGBTQ community is made a part of mainstream society. 

The judgment was issued by Justice N Anand Venkatesh who had undergone an educational session with a psychologist to understand same-sex relationships before pronouncing the order. Dictating his order, Justice Venkatesh directed several reforms in educational institutions including holding Parents Teacher Association (PTA) meetings to sensitize parents on the issues of the LGBTQ community and gender-nonconforming students as well as changes in the school curriculum. 

Apart from this, the Madras HC has directed educational institutions: 

• To include gender-neutral restrooms
• Change of name and gender on academic records for transgender persons
• Inclusion of 'transgender' in addition to M and F gender columns in application forms 
• Appointment of counsellors who are LGBTQ inclusive, for staff and students to address grievances. 

Admitting to his 'pre-conceived notions' about same-sex relationships, Justice Anand Venkatesh in his judgment following his educational session to understand the LGBTQ community remarked, "I have no hesitation in accepting that I too belong to the majority of commoners who are yet to comprehend homosexuality completely... The society and my upbringing have always treated the terms 'homosexual', 'gay', 'lesbian' as anathema. A majority of the society would stand in the same position of ignorance and preconceived notions." 

Action against those practising 'conversion therapy'

In their petition, the lesbian couple who had run away from their homes in Chennai had sought protection from police harassment at the instance of their parents. To counter the same, Justice Venkatesh directed police and prison authorities to hold programs at regular intervals on steps to be taken for protection and prevention of offences against the LGBTQ community, adding that programs to sensitize officials about the legal rights of the community should also be held at regular intervals. 

Significantly, the High Court ordered that mental health camps and awareness programs should be conducted to understand gender, sexuality, sexual orientation and promote acceptance of diversity. The judgment laid down that action will be initiated against concerned medical professional involving themselves in any form or method of 'conversion therapy' which includes revoking their license to practice. 

"The police, on receipt of any complaint regarding girl/woman/man missing cases which upon investigation is found to involve consenting adults belonging to the LGBTQIA+ community, shall upon receipt of their statements, close the complaint without subjecting them to any harassment," the order reads. 

1622882203148_W.P.No.7284 of 2021 by Republic on Scribd

Delhi HC adjourns same-sex marriage plea

In another case, the Delhi High Court earlier this month adjourned on pleas pertaining to same-sex marriages till July 6 after the Centre sought an adjournment stating that the govt was focusing on COVID issues now. The plea seeks recognition for same-sex marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act, Special Marriage Act and Foreign Marriage Act. 

In its counter-affidavit in February, the Centre stated, "Relationships can be governed, regulated, permitted or proscribed only by a law made by the competent legislature. The acceptance of the institution of marriage between two individuals of the same gender is neither recognized nor accepted in any uncodified personal laws or any codified statutory laws". Centre also stated that Supreme Court's 2018 verdict had merely 'decriminalized a particular human behaviour', not 'legitimise the conduct in question'.