From Nalsa To Supriyo: Shifting Stance Of Transgender Personal Rights In Indian Law

Abstract

This paper provides a jurisprudential analysis of the evolving legal status of transgender persons in India, focusing on the shifting judicial stance from proactive recognition to judicial restraint. The analysis begins with a critical examination of the landmark judgment in National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) v. Union of India, which established a constitutional basis for transgender identity, affirming the rights to self-determination and dignity. It argues that this decision served as a paradigm shift, although its spirit was not fully realized in the subsequent Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, which introduced restrictive bureaucratic and medicalized hurdles. The paper then conducts a comprehensive analysis of the recent Supriyo Chakrabarty v. Union of India judgment (2023), which, while affirming the right of transgender persons to marry under existing heterosexual laws, denied a fundamental right to marry for queer persons, marking a jurisprudential turn towards legislative deference. The research highlights the persistent gap between legal doctrine and social reality, particularly in the realm of personal rights such as marriage, adoption, and inheritance, which remain governed by a heteronormative framework. The paper concludes with a roadmap for legislative and administrative reforms to align the law with the constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination.