Technically SC order on Section 377 right: Legal experts

New Delhi: The Supreme Court judgement on Section 377 has led to a nationwide debate over its relevance in today's modern world. Gay rights activists, social activists and even top politicians including Congress President Sonia Gandhi have expressed their unhappiness over the judgement, which makes homosexual relationship a crime.

Perhaps, no other judgement of the Supreme Court attracted so much public attention in recent times. There is a strong demand for the review of the judgement delivered by the Supreme Court.

However, some legal experts who have studied the Supreme Court judgement on section-377 feel that there is nothing wrong with the judgement.

According to a top lawyer and former Additional Solicitor General of India KN Bhat, technically the Supreme Court verdict is correct. Speaking to IBNLive he said. "I agree that homosexuality is a personal choice and can't be governed by a law. It is now up to Parliament to make it legal. In the last four years (after the Delhi High Court order decriminalizsing it), there was no law and order problem in India. Life was normal. But, one can't blame the Supreme Court for its verdict. It has done it's job in accordance with the Constitution. The critics must ask Parliament to amend laws, not the Supreme Court."

KN Bhat said that homosexuality was punishable by death in England in the 1800s and they imposed their Victorian values over us in the second half of 1800s. "It is now up to Parliament to decide, if we need an archaic British law or a modern one with proper safeguards," he said.

Noted lawyer and social activist Prameela Nesargi also agrees with Bhat. Nesargi, who has studied the judgement said that there was nothing wrong with it.

She said, "The judgement is in accordance with the law. I have studied it. The SC has done a fair job. The verdict is technically correct. But, the Parliament can amend the laws and make it legal. We can make consensual adult homosexual relationship legal by amending the law. Making it legal without safeguards will surely lead to the exploitation of young children".

Nesargi feels that the language being used by the critics against the judgement is not proper. She says they should show a greater restraint. She said, "People can't criticise judgement in whatever manner they want. There has to be some dignity."

Nesargi claims that the judgement is constitutionally valid.