.svg)
Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli v. State of Telangana
| Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli v. State of Telangana | |
|---|---|
| Court | Telangana High Court |
| Full case name | Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli & Ors. versus State of Telangana & Ors. |
| Decided | 6 July 2023 |
| Citation(s) | WP(PIL) No. 44 of 2018 |
| Case opinions | |
| |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Ujjal Bhuyan CJ. and C.V. Bhaskar Reddy J. |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Ujjal Bhuyan CJ. and C.V. Bhaskar Reddy J. |
| Keywords | |
| Criminal Stereotyping, Institutional Discrimination, Intersex Rights, Non-binary Gender Rights, Transgender Rights | |
Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli & Ors. versus State of Telangana & Ors. (2023), a landmark decision of Telangana High Court, invalidating the Telangana Eunuchs Act of 1329 Fasli which categorized intersex, non-binary gender, and transgender individuals as susceptible to criminal actions, as it was found to be in violation of the constitution.[1][2][3]
The court has directed the State Welfare Board for Transgender Persons in Telangana to collaborate with legal services authorities in order to ensure the successful implementation of the Transgender Persons Act of 2019, the Transgender Persons Rules of 2020, and the action plan formulated by the board. The court emphasized that the collaboration should involve proactive actions, such as actively engaging with transgender individuals to streamline the process of issuing identity certificates and ensuring access to a range of welfare programs.[1][3]
The court issued a directive stating that the benefits of the Aasara Pension Scheme, which was implemented by the State Government of Telangana, must be expanded to encompass transgender individuals as a distinct group.[1][2][3]
Until comprehensive legislation is put in place, the Court mandated the State Government of Telangana to issue government orders and administrative directives to implement affirmative action through horizontal reservation for transgender individuals, as Other Backward Class, securing admission to educational institutions and facilitating recruitment into Government and public services.[1][2][3]
Background[edit | edit source]
During British rule in India, intersex, non-binary gender and transgender individuals were referred to as 'eunuchs' in a stigmatizing manner. The British introduced discriminatory laws based on gender identity, including an 1897 amendment that added 'eunuchs' to the Criminal Tribes Act of 1873, an Act that presumed certain communities were predisposed to criminal activity. The amendment introduced a separate section for 'eunuchs', defining them as impotent males. They were mandated to register with local authorities and faced restrictions on acting as guardians for minors, executing gifts or wills, and adopting sons, with violations carrying the risk of imprisonment. They were prohibited from 'dressing like a woman' in public, engaging in dance, and partaking in public exhibitions.[4][5]
While the Criminal Tribes Act was repealed in 1949, similar language persisted in other laws to control and surveil transgender individuals. The current case pertains to the Telangana Eunuchs Act of 1329 Fasli, formerly known as the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Eunuchs Act of 1329 Fasli, which was initially enacted in 1919. Following the division of the united Andhra Pradesh into Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, the Act was renamed as the Telangana Eunuchs Act of 1329 Fasli.[4][5][6][7] The Act empowers Police and State Authorities to the maintenance of a register detailing the names and residences of 'eunuchs' suspected of engaging in activities such as 'kidnapping and emasculating boys' or of committing 'unnatural offences' or abetting the commission of such offences.[5][6]
Proceedings[edit | edit source]
The petition presented to the Telangana High Court seeks the following relief concerning intersex, non-binary gender and transgender individuals.
- A declaration that the Telangana Eunuchs Act of 1329 Fasli, is unconstitutional, and infringes on the Fundamental Rights conferred by Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.[3][6][8]
- A request to temporarily halt the enforcement of the Telangana Eunuchs Act of 1329 Fasli, invoking Section 151 of the CPC, which grants the court authority to issue orders to ensure justice and prevent potential misuse.[3]
See Also[edit | edit source]
- LGBT rights in India
- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018)
- Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
- Karnataka Sexual Minorities Forum v. State of Karnataka (2017)
- National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014)
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 "Hits and misses of Telangana High Court's Order striking down the 'Eunuch' Act – The Leaflet". theleaflet.in. 2023-07-15. Retrieved 2023-08-27.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Sasikumar, Meenakshy (2023-07-10). "Telangana High Court Scraps 'Unconstitutional' Eunuchs Act: Here's Why It Needed To Go". TheQuint. Retrieved 2023-08-27.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli v. State of Telangana, Writ Petition (Public Interest Litigation) No. 44 of 2018 (Telangana High Court 6 July 2023).
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Hinchy, Jessica Bridgette (2 July 2019). "The long history of criminalising Hijras". Himal Southasian. Archived from the original on 9 July 2019.
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Kothari, Jayna (2019). "Section 377 and Beyond: A New Era for Transgender Equality?" (PDF). In Meinardus, Ronald (ed.). How liberal is India? the quest for freedom in the biggest democracy on earth. New Delhi: Academic Foundation. ISBN 978-93-327-0507-4.
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 "Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli & Ors. v. State of Telangana". Centre for Law & Policy Research. Retrieved 2023-08-27.
- ↑ "Telangana Eunuchs Act of 1329 Fasli". Act of 1919 (PDF). Telangana Legislature.
- ↑ "Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli v. State of Telangana & Ors". Centre for Law & Policy Research. Retrieved 2023-08-28.