'We will talk to Muslim, Christian organisations and form a broad alliance so that every temple, church and mosque will have freedom to manage their affairs and not to be intervened upon.'
In a landmark judgment, after months of deliberations, the Supreme Court on Thursday struck down the Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalised homosexuality. A five-judge Constitution bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud, Rohinton Fali Nariman, A M Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra in its verdict said, "Criminalising gay sex is irrational and indefensible." Following this historic judgment, reactions poured in on Twitter, celebrating the verdict. Here are some of them.
The former woman employee of the apex court, who has levelled the sexual harassment allegations, has opted herself out from participating in the enquiry.
The former CJI was criticised for being part of a special bench set up to hear a suo motu case titled 'In Re: Matter of Great Public Importance Touching upon the Independence of the Judiciary' on a Saturday on April 20, 2019.
The Delhi high court had earlier allowed Indian pharma major Wockhardt to sell its Ace Proxyvon tablets, which is a mixture of three salts -- aceclofenac, paracetamol and rabeprazol -- a combination that is banned.
Pandalam Royal family member Sasikumar Varma, one of the petitioners, said he was happy with the apex court's decision to review the September 28 verdict.
Hailing from a family of lawyers from Maharashtra, he was part of a nine-judge Bench of the Supreme Court which in August 2017 declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right of an individual.
The five-judge Constitution bench said that it is the devotion which makes a woman to visit a temple.
"The right to enter a temple is not dependent on a legislation. It is the constitutional right," the bench said.
The verdict is likely to be pronounced before October 2 this year as Justice Misra would be retiring as CJI on that day.
Justice Indira Banerjee, who was the eighth woman judge in the Supreme Court, on Friday demitted office with Chief Justice of India UU Lalit, terming her as a "jewel" of the legal fraternity.
A notice by the office of Supreme Court Secretary General also said that the report of the committee constituted as part of the in-house procedure is not liable to be made public.
The top law officer said that even if some people of the community have come up, the stigma of caste and backwardness is still attached to them.
Observing that an environment has been created in the Indian society over the years that has led to deep-rooted discrimination against the community, a five-judge constitution bench, hearing petitions seeking decriminalisation of 158-year-old colonial law under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, said discrimination against such people has also adversely impacted their mental health.
The court will consider issues related to entry of Muslim women into mosques, female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra Muslim community and barring of Parsi women, married to non-Parsi men, from the holy fire place at Agiary.
The apex court had on Tuesday agreed to hear on January 22 in open court the pleas seeking review of its verdict but refused to stay its judgment.
On the last date of hearing, the Maharashtra police had produced additional letters to establish Moist links of the arrested accused even as the petitioners described it as cooked-up evidence.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and justices L N Rao and Dinesh Maheshwari said it was only going into the aspect of security of the two women and would not like to entertain any other prayer made in the petition.
'The Supreme Court should not have come out with this kind of order and in my opinion, the court should correct it.'
The apex court said banning entry of women to Kerala's Sabrimala temple is gender discrimination and the practice violates rights of Hindu women.
Senior advocate Indira Jaising said the case should be transferred to Chandigarh due to proximity to Kathua in Jammu and Kashmir and the incidents of obstruction of police personnel by lawyers of the local court.
The matter came up for hearing before a bench headed by Justice D Y Chandrachud which had on September 15 restrained the channel from telecasting episodes of the programme till further orders, saying 'the intent' of aired episodes 'prima facie' appears to 'vilify' the community.
More and more pictures from Alia Bhatt and Ranbir Kapoor's wedding!
The temple board, in earlier round of litigation, had opposed the public interest litigation by Indian Young Lawyers Association seeking to throw open the shrine for all women.
In the plea, one of the women, who had been attacked by her mother-in-law following her entry into the hilltop shrine, has sought security for both the women.
The top court had on March 17, maintaining that women and men officers should be treated equally, cleared PC for women in the Navy and asked the Centre to complete the modalities within three months.
The Centre had left to the wisdom of the court the issue of legality of the penal provision.
A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra and K M Joseph was informed by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that Sudarshan TV has to give reply to the show cause notice by September 28, failing which an ex parte decision will be taken.
'Is the idea of a committed judiciary once again being floated, though surreptitiously, unlike in the past when it was direct?'
Justice Bobde has decided several key cases and was part of the recent historic verdict that cleared the way for the construction of a Ram Temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya.
'Because of the Supreme Court judgment, I am being denied my freedom of religion.'
'It is time to stand up for our sisters and brothers and friends and their families.' 'It is time to share the burden and remind them, like the highest court in the land just did, that they are not alone and that you wouldn't stand for their persecution,' says Ankit Deshpande.
Timeline of events relating to proceedings on the issue.
We don't want 2 gay men holding hands walking on Marine Drive Marine Drive should be disturbed by the police'
The apex court, while hearing a plea raising grievance over the programme, said that the manner in which some media houses are conducting debate is a matter of concern as all kind of defamatory things are being said.
'Not providing a copy to the complainant while holding her complaint to be unfounded would be a violation of the principles of natural justice and a complete travesty of justice'
One of the most important cases which have political implications is the Ayodhya land dispute case.
The apex court struck down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code dealing with the offence stating it was archaic and violative of right to equality.
The petitioners seeking reconsideration by a larger bench, the observations made by it in a 1994 verdict that a mosque was not integral to Islam.
'The Sabarimala issue is no longer in splendid isolation.'
© 2026 Rediff.com - Investor Information - Advertise with us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy - Sitemap - Feedback - About us - Terms of use - Grievances