A PIL in the Delhi High Court seeks to include transgender women under rape laws, challenging Section 63 BNS and Section 18 of the Transgender Rights Act. Senior Advocate N Hariharan has been appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court.
The Supreme Court of India will hear an appeal from the Rouse Avenue District Court Bar Association contesting the Delhi High Court’s recognition of the Central Delhi Court Bar Association as the primary bar association for Rouse Avenue Court. The appeal highlights procedural concerns regarding the Bar Council of Delhi’s actions.
The Allahabad High Court ruled that conversion to Islam is valid if done voluntarily, with free will, and by a person of sound mind. The court made this observation while dismissing a plea by Taufik Ahmad, who sought to quash rape and unlawful conversion charges against him.It emphasized that forced or coerced conversions cannot be legally recognized, reinforcing the principle of religious freedom.
The Supreme Court directed newly designated Senior Advocates to inform their clients about their senior status. This move aims to ensure transparency and awareness among litigants. The designation comes with added responsibilities and higher fees, making disclosure crucial. The court’s directive reinforces ethical legal practices.
Madras: The Madras High Court has raised concerns over the continued use of the term “Gender Identity Disorder” to describe transgender individuals and those belonging to the LGBTQIA+ community. Justice Anand Venkatesh strongly objected to such terminology, emphasizing that it wrongly suggests that being LGBTQIA+ is a disorder when, in reality, it is a natural identity.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that children born from invalid marriages must not be denied birth registration. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua emphasized that these children have rights regardless of their parents’ marital status, reinforcing their legal identity and protection under the law. The court ordered authorities to update relevant records accordingly.
![[BREAKING] Same Sex Marriage | Justice Sanjeev Khanna Recused Himself from the Hearing Citing Personal Reasons](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/image-33-1.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Justice Sanjeev Khanna today recused himself from hearing a review petition on same-sex marriage, leading to the reconstitution of a five-judge constitutional bench by CJI DY Chandrachud. The Supreme Court deferred the hearing, and it was clarified that review petitions are decided in chambers, with no open court hearing. The original judgment denied marriage rights to queer couples.
The Supreme Court will review 13 petitions challenging the 2023 verdict on same-sex marriage in India. A specially constituted five-judge bench, including Chief Justice Chandrachud, will consider the petitions. The review aims for a more inclusive interpretation of marriage laws to encompass same-sex couples. Justices Khanna and Nagarathna have replaced retired Justices Kaul and Bhat.