Divan relies on #Puttaswamy judgment (privacy), #ShafinJahan (Hadiya), Lawrence v. Texas.
"So Parliament itself now recognises them", Justice Chandrachud.
But whenever there has been historical deep-rooted discrimination, then State has resorted to affirmative action, submits CU Singh
Macaulay while introducing this provision said he does not even want to discuss about this provision as according to him it was revolting and odious, submits Krishnan Venugopal.
He has handed over some document to the court saying persons with different perceptions look at things differently.
"Look at some liberal Constitutions. We will point out some countries on map where you need to look at", Justice Chandrachud to one counsel who was for retaining Section 377.
No no, says CJI Dipak Misra.
"There was a u-turn by govt which causes serious concerns for public at large", says Manoj George.
IPC falls under concurrent list. If any of the States wanted to amend it, they would have done so. They have not, says George.
That does not mean its Constitutionality cannot be challenged, CJI Dipak Misra.