Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.



No description

Danish Sheikh

on 3 December 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of 1994


ABVA Petition filed in Delhi High Court


Naz Foundation Petition filed in Delhi High Court


JACK Intervention filed on ground that law is required to prevent HIV from spreading


Government of India affidavit ( Ministry of Home Affairs) supporting retention of law on grounds that criminal law must reflect public morality and that Indian society disapproved of homosexuality

Delhi High Court dismissed petition on the ground that the petitioner, Naz Foundation was not affected by Sec 377 and hence had no 'locus standi' to challenge the law.

Delhi High Court rejected a review petition filed which challenged the previous order

On an appeal filed by Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court passed an order remanding the case back to the Delhi High Court so the matter could be heard on merits

National Aids Control Organization(NACO) filed an affidavit stating that the enforcement of Sec 377 is a hindrance to HIV prevention efforts.

An intervention was filed by B.P. Singhal stating that homosexuality is against Indian culture and that the law needs to be retained.
September 2008

The matter was posted for final arguments before C.J. Shah and J. Muralidhar

An intervention was filed by Voices Against 377 supporting the petitioner and stating that Sec 377 is violative of the fundamental rights of LGBT persons. .
July 2009

Judgment in Naz Foundation v. NCR Delhi delivered
November 2008

The matter was reserved for judgment after 12 days of hearing
July 2009

First SLP filed in the Supreme Court by Suresh Kumar Koushal challenging the Naz Foundation judgement
2009 - 2011

Fifteen other SLP's are filed challenging the Naz Foundation judgment by
 Apostolic Churches Allicance tr its Bishop v. Naz Foundation & Ors
 SK Tijarawala v. Naz Foundation & Ors.
 Bhim Singh v. Naz Foundation & Ors
 B. Krishna Bhat v. Naz Foundation & Ors.
 B.P. Singhal v. Naz Foundation & Ors.
 S.D. Pratinidhi Sabha & Anr. v. Naz Foundation & Ors.
 Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights v. Naz Foundation & Ors.
 Ram Murti v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
 Krantikari Manuvadi Morcha Party v. Naz Foundation & Others
 Raza Academy v. Naz Foundation & Others
 Tamil Nadu Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam v. Naz Foundation & Others.
 Utkal Christian Council v. Naz Foundation & Others
 Joint Action Kannur v. Naz Foundation and Others
 All India Muslim Personal Law Board v. Naz Foundation and Others
 Trust Gods Ministry vs. Naz Foundation and Others

2009 - 2011

Interventions filed supporting the Naz judgement by
 Minna Saran and 18 other parents of LGBT person
 Sekhar Seshadri and12 other mental health professionals
 Nivedita Menon and fifteen other academics
 Shyam Benegal
 Ratna Kapur and other law academics

February 2012

Final Arguments before the Supreme Court commence
March 2012

Case reserved for judgment after 15 days of arguments over 6 weeks
December 2012

Justice Singvi retires
Full transcript