[Reader-list] High Court to Abolish Section 377 IPC (Anti-Sodomy) ?

[Rajendra Bhat Uppinangadi]

Dear all,

 it was sacred duty of men in media oops, sorry, women also, to report
accurately, but alas, the media has failed miserably by hyping the issues
than going in for distinctive analysis, as seen yesterday in all English
news channels, it was as if sodomy has been legalized, instead of correct
position of report sodomy is de-criminalized.?

 More importantly, the rights of individuals to have lifestyles that they
enjoy without impinging on others rights in society has been upheld.

 Further, the word queer is misused here in reportage, as there are queers ,
all are queers in one way or other as different individuals have different
ways of life.!

  Any comments.?

Regards, Rajen.

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 11:33 PM, A.K. Malik <akmalik45 at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> Dear Mr Kaul,
>                The decisions of the High Courts have nowadays become
> infrutuous as every Tom, Dick and Harry appeals to the Supreme Court and the
> Supreme Court invariably admits the appeal.(With due regards to the Hon'ble
> HC & SC).
> Regards,
>
> (A.K.MALIK)
>
>
> --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Aditya Raj Kaul <kauladityaraj at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Aditya Raj Kaul <kauladityaraj at gmail.com>
> > Subject: [Reader-list] High Court to Abolish Section 377 IPC
> (Anti-Sodomy) ?
> > To: "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 12:04 AM
> > Lord Macaulay wouldn't be smiling in
> > his grave if this comes true.
> >
> > For Sarai list members - A rumour doing the rounds all day
> > in media suggests
> > that the High Court may abolish or at least pass a strong
> > verdict against
> > the Section 377 IPC.
> >
> > Some experts however say it wouldn't be that easy and the
> > case might be
> > immediately transferred to the Supreme Court.
> >
> > Hope this is helpful.
> >
> > thanks
> > Aditya Raj Kaul
> >
> > *More from IANS*
> >
> > The verdict will be the first to be delivered by an Indian
> > court on a 19th
> > century law that treats homosexual activity as a criminal
> > offence.
> >
> > The petitioners, including voluntary organisation Naz
> > Foundation, pleaded
> > that the criminal provision against homosexual behaviour
> > should be scrapped
> > for consenting adults who indulge in such acts in private.
> >
> > The petition said that Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code
> > (IPC) is
> > violative of their fundamental right.
> >
> > Section 377 of the IPC says an individual who
> > “voluntarily has carnal
> > intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman
> > or animal” shall
> > be imprisoned for life or for a term exceeding 10 years and
> > be liable to pay
> > a fine.
> >
> > During the course of the proceedings, the health ministry
> > and the home
> > ministry, respondents to the petition, were divided in
> > their opinion, with
> > the health ministry’s affidavit supporting the
> > petitioners and the home
> > ministry opposing decriminalization of same-sex activity
> > saying such
> > behaviour was immoral and could not be allowed in Indian
> > society.
> > _________________________________________
> > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the
> > city.
> > Critiques & Collaborations
> > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net
> > with subscribe in the subject header.
> > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>




-- 
Rajen.