PDF
FLIP
html
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Abstract
This paper analyzes two landmark judgments on the right to privacy and LGBTQ+ rights in India. Both of these judgments form part of the same picture, the article analyses these judgments and their decision-making approach in light of natural justice theory. The Supreme Court’s recognition of the right to privacy paves way for the protection of LGBT rights in India. The cumulative effect of the two judgments under analysis demonstrate the need for an expansive interpretation of fundamental and natural rights using natural justice theory.
Keywords:
References
Court Cases
Justice K S Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (Writ Petition Number 494 of 2012). 12
Kharak Singh v. St. of U.P. 1963 AIR 1295 4
Munn v. Illinois, 94 U.S. 113 (1876). 6
National Legal Service Authority v. Union of India, (2014) 5 SCC 438 3
Peter Semayne v Richard Gresham All ER Rep 62; 5 Co Rep 91 a; Cro Eliz 908; Moore KB 668; Yelv 29 77 ER 194 5
Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25. (1949) 2
Treaties
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 7 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 7
Other Authorities
December 1890 in the Harvard Law Review—“The Right to Privacy” 5
Article 51(c) of Indian Constitution, 1950 7
Constituent Assembly Debates 3
Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA) 2002, Acts of the Parliament,2002 (South Africa) 11
Stanford encyclopaedia of Philosophy, Autonomy in Moral and Political Philosophy 3
Reference by
