https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170267 Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code was treated as a conduct-based penal provision rather than a classification targeting homosexuals or other sexual minorities, and therefore as not violating Articles 14 or 15. Privacy, dignity and autonomy under Article 21 were recognised as protected interests but not absolute against a valid penal enactment absent a clear constitutional violation. The expression "carnal intercourse against the order of nature" was regarded as having a workable judicial meaning, while possible misuse by enforcement authorities affected particular actions rather than the provision's validity. The provision was accordingly not struck down or read down, based on a presumption of constitutionality for pre-Constitution penal laws. en-us Wed, 11 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Oct 2015 22:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170267 Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code was treated as a conduct-based penal provision rather than a classification targeting homosexuals or other sexual minorities, and therefore as not violating Articles 14 or 15. Privacy, dignity and autonomy under Article 21 were recognised as protected interests but not absolute against a valid penal enactment absent a clear constitutional violation. The expression "carnal intercourse against the order of nature" was regarded as having a workable judicial meaning, while possible misuse by enforcement authorities affected particular actions rather than the provision's validity. The provision was accordingly not struck down or read down, based on a presumption of constitutionality for pre-Constitution penal laws. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 11 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170267