Latest news with #AnandVenkatesh
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
LGBTQ Rights in India: Madras High Court's Gender-Neutral Toilets Set Powerful Precedent
In June 2024, the Madras high court made history by becoming one of the first in India to install three gender-neutral toilets on its campus. AI generated image Srimathi Venkatachari For many transgender persons in India, life is a long negotiation between identity and invisibility. You may walk past them on a street, share a bus seat, or smile at them briefly in an office corridor. But too often, society either stares with ridicule or looks away in silence. Very few see the human behind the label — someone seeking nothing more than dignity, respect and a chance to live as they truly are. In June 2024, the Madras high court made history by becoming one of the first in India to install three gender-neutral toilets on its campus. A LinkedIn post by transgender advocate Kanmani R (verified in June 2024) confirms the high court has installed three new gender neutral washrooms on its premises, marking a meaningful step toward inclusive facilities. You Can Also Check: Chennai AQI | Weather in Chennai | Bank Holidays in Chennai | Public Holidays in Chennai This infrastructural change, while seemingly small, is a profound act of institutional empathy — a recognition of the rights and dignity of transgender and gender-nonconforming persons. In a legal landscape where detachment is often valorized, Justice Anand Venkatesh stood apart and more recently, so did the bench of Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayanan when approached by a same-sex couple seeking protection from their disapproving parents. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Dementia Has Been Linked To a Common Habit. Do You Do It? Memory Health Learn More Undo Justice Anand Venkatesh paused the hearing, stating that he needed time to 'understand same-sex relationships' before delivering a judgment. He wrote to psychologists, read scientific literature, and interacted with LGBTQIA+ individuals. 'I am trying to break my preconceived notions about this issue. I have no hesitation in admitting that I am not fully 'woke' to this subject. I am willing to understand,' he said. That journey translated into a series of bold, progressive directives such as the ban on conversion therapy in Tamil Nadu; directions to revise school and college curricula to include LGBTQIA+ issues; a mandate for sensitisation of police and government officials; a push for gender-neutral restrooms in public and institutional spaces; and monitoring of implementation through status reports. It is from this context that the gender-neutral washrooms in the Madras High Court campus must be seen, not just as construction projects, but as judicially seeded symbols of change. Toilets might seem mundane, but for transgender persons, the lack of safe, affirming restrooms can lead to harassment, violence, or complete avoidance of public life. Recognising this, in the Sushma case, Justice Venkatesh urged the Union and state govts to ensure provision of gender-neutral restrooms, especially in public institutions such as courts, colleges and govt offices. His orders made it clear that dignity begins with access. Following his directions and subsequent PILs in 2023-24, the Madras HC's campus became the first to act on these ideals, completing the installation of three gender-neutral toilets by June 2024. Even as courts such as Madras HC move toward inclusion, India's primary transgender law —the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 — lags behind. Justice Venkatesh had flagged issues with the law, notably the requirement of certification for gender identity, a direct contradiction of the NALSA judgment (2014); the absence of provisions for reservations, marriage, adoption, and inheritance; and tokenistic punishment for violence and abuse against transgender persons. He echoed the demand that LGBTQIA+ rights in India must not come with red tape, nor be made conditional upon medical procedures or administrative approval. The Madras HC's move symbolises judicial responsibility not just to interpret the law, but to humanise it. It aligns with Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, guaranteeing equality and dignity. It responds to community-led demands, acknowledging that legal victories must be followed by institutional change. Building on this vision, the road ahead must include amending the 2019 Act to fully honour self-identification, introduce reservations, and grant family rights; enacting a national anti-discrimination law covering gender, caste, class, disability, and sexuality; public funding for gender-affirming healthcare, and psychological support tailored to transgender needs; mandatory training for police, teachers, and judges on gender identity and inclusion; and a curriculum changes at school and university levels to foster respect and awareness from a young age. Justice Indu Malhotra said it best: 'History owes an apology to the LGBTQ community.' But an apology is not enough. The transgender community does not need charity. They deserve citizenship, not conditional sympathy. It's time India matched its legal promises with social and institutional will. When the judiciary listened India has known and embraced gender diversity for centuries. Communities such as the hijras have been part of festivals, births and blessings. But colonial rule brought with it a rigid gender binary and criminalisation, casting the transgender identity into the shadows. The Criminal Tribes Act, 1871, reduced Hijras to a stereotype, criminal by default. This stigma, though the law is long gone, survives in whispered judgments and silent exclusions. Change didn't begin in Parliament — it started in courtrooms. 1. NALSA v. Union of India (2014) A historic verdict that recognised the right to self-identify one's gender. For the first time, India's highest court said: You exist. You matter. You are equal. Transgender persons were granted constitutional rights under Articles 14, 15, 16, 19(1)(a), and 21. 2. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) A landmark ruling on privacy, affirming that one's gender identity is deeply personal and fundamentally protected. 3. Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India (2018) With the striking down of Section 377, the court did more than decriminalise love — it restored the humanity of millions. 4. Arun Kumar vs IG of Registration (2019) The Madras High Court reminded us that the law must evolve with empathy — recognising that a transwoman can be a bride under Hindu marriage laws. 5. S Sushma vs Commissioner of Police (2021) A rare moment of judicial humility where a judge chose to unlearn and relearn by listening to LGBTQ+ voices. The court ordered safeguards, called out police excesses and banned conversion therapy. Law with good intentions, but glaring gaps The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, tried to put NALSA into law. It made discrimination illegal. It defined transgender broadly. However, it fell short because it required certificates for self-identity, which undermines the very core of NALSA. It ignored reservations, despite clear directions. It kept family rights such as marriage, adoption and inheritance out of reach. And its punishments for abuse were tokenistic. Today, this law is under challenge in the Supreme Court. Beyond law: A daily struggle for survival Even with progressive judgments and half-baked legislation, most transgender persons live on the margins: 92% remain unemployed in the formal sector More than 60% are pushed into begging or sex work More than 50% drop out of school due to bullying and abuse (The writer is an advocate in Madras high court) ALSO READ: LGBTIQA+ couples have right to find a family: Madras high court
Time of India
4 days ago
- General
- Time of India
Can't deny entry into temple on basis of caste, says HC
Chennai: Asserting that caste-based discrimination cannot be permitted in a country governed by the rule of law, Madras high court has ordered legal action against anyone who prevents others' entry into a temple based on caste. Justice N Anand Venkatesh, passing orders on a plea that flagged prevention of people from Scheduled Castes into Ayyanar temple in Pudukudi village, Udayarpalayam taluk, Ariyalur, said: "Caste and community are the creations of human beings and god is always considered to be neutral. That apart, preventing persons from offering prayers on the basis that they belong to scheduled caste communities, is an affront to the dignity of persons who are discriminated against based on their caste. " "If a temple is permitted to be visited by the public, it assumes the character of a public temple. In such an event, irrespective of the caste or community of the devotees, they must be permitted to offer their prayers to god," said the judge. You Can Also Check: Chennai AQI | Weather in Chennai | Bank Holidays in Chennai | Public Holidays in Chennai This can never be permitted in a country, which is governed by the rule of law. That apart, Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Temple Entry Authorisation Act, 1947, makes it abundantly clear that notwithstanding any law, custom or usage to the contrary, every Hindu irrespective of the caste or sect to which he belongs to, shall be entitled to enter any Hindu temple and offer worship therein, Justice Anand Venkatesh said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo If they are restricted entry, it will amount to an actionable wrong and the person concerned can be sued or prosecuted there for. This act came into force after a long struggle by many leaders, who wanted to ensure that persons are not prevented from entering the temples based on their caste, he said. The judge added that the Act was brought into force as a policy taken by the Tamil Nadu govt to remove the disabilities imposed on certain classes of Hindus against entry into Hindu temples in the state. The issue pertains to a plea moved by Venkatesan. He submitted that recently idols installed by people belonging to the scheduled caste at Ayyanar temple located in Pudukudi village, Udayarpalayam taluk, Ariyalur were vandalised by a certain group of dominant caste members. He further alleged that members of the scheduled castes were only being allowed to view the deity from behind a large iron gate installed in the temple. Therefore, he wanted the court to direct the authorities to allow members belonging to scheduled castes to enter the temple and worship the deity and to permit them to participate in the temple car festival scheduled from July 16 to 31. Recording the submissions, Justice Anand Venkatesh said, "…there shall be a direction to the district SP and RDO to ensure that all classes of Hindus are permitted to enter the temple and participate in the festival." If anyone prevents them from participating, action shall be taken in accordance with law. It shall be ensured that no law and order problem is created, the court concluded.
Time of India
6 days ago
- Time of India
Sexual assault probe: HC flays police insensitivity
Chennai: In yet another incident of police insensitivity while handling cases of sexual harassment, a woman victim was made to view her leaked non-consensual intimate images (NCII) in the presence of seven male police officers. The videos, shared online by her boyfriend, were shown to her during the investigation process to "identify" the accused. "It was not only the accused who violated her dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, but also each of the seven police officers present during the inquiry," Justice Anand Venkatesh said. "It was like adding insult to injury. Don't the officers have a little bit of sense? Society will not question the boy who committed the crime; it will question only the girl who the victim is," the judge said. You Can Also Check: Chennai AQI | Weather in Chennai | Bank Holidays in Chennai | Public Holidays in Chennai In the name of investigation, more harassment was meted out to the victim. The police are dealing with the case as if they were dealing with thugs, he added. This is not an ordinary case, in which the police are dealing with morons. The accused in such cases are the most intelligent, deadliest persons sitting in a room that we don't know where, Justice Anand Venkatesh said. The court then censured the police for revealing the name of the victim in the FIR and directed that it must be redacted from the FIR and from all those documents where it was incorporated during the investigation. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Đây có thể là thời điểm tốt nhất để giao dịch vàng trong 5 năm qua IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo In no place must the name of the victim girl be shown, the judge said. As to the removal of the NCII of the woman lawyer from the internet, the Union govt informed the court that immediate steps were taken to block all the websites from where the contents could not be removed. However, Senior advocate Abudu Kumar Rajaratnam for the petitioner submitted that the videos/intimate images once again resurfaced on 39 sites. He produced the particulars of those 39 sites to the court. Recording the submission, the court directed the Union govt to file an affidavit explaining the various steps that were initiated and give a prototype as to what a victim girl must do when she is faced with a situation like this. In the meantime, the Union govt shall ensure that the NCII does not resurface and the technology discussed in the order passed by the Delhi and Karnataka high courts shall be adopted, he said. If ultimately, the Union can completely block the NCII and prevent it from resurfacing, it will be a test case that can be applied in the future to handle the situation more effectively, he added.
Time of India
09-07-2025
- Time of India
Madras high court appalled by monstrous men, orders Centre to delete obscene pictures of young lawyer
Madras high court CHENNAI: 'A man can become a monster,' said Justice N Anand Venkatesh of Madras high court , empathising with a young woman lawyer whose dignity was battered after her non-consensual intimate images and videos were circulated on the internet by the man she had trusted. Her intimate images — recorded and shared without consent by the man who promised to marry her — were uploaded online and distributed across more than 70 websites, including pornographic platforms and social media, leading to severe personal and professional distress for her. Justice Anand Venkatesh, who was visibly moved during the hearing, said, 'What if it happened to my daughter?' He then directed the Union govt to invoke its authority under the Information Technology Act and ensure the removal of all such content from the internet within 48 hours. You Can Also Check: Chennai AQI | Weather in Chennai | Bank Holidays in Chennai | Public Holidays in Chennai 'In the considered view of this court, it is the duty of a constitutional court to safeguard the fundamental rights guaranteed to all persons and not limited to just citizens when it comes to gross violations of Article 21. The right to privacy and the right to dignity are guaranteed under Article 21, and the same is being violated every second insofar as the petitioner is concerned,' the judge said. 'Therefore, this court has to exercise its power and ensure that the untold agony faced by the petitioner is at least mitigated by removing those contents as early as possible and to ensure that the petitioner can lead a normal life at least in the future,' he added. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Get ₹2Cr life cover@ ₹700 p.m. ICICI Pru Life Insurance Plan Get Quote Undo Representing the petitioner, senior advocate Abdu Kumar Rajaratnam brought to the notice of the court a judgment passed by Delhi high court in 2023, setting guidelines to be followed by the authorities to deal with such cases. 'Delhi high court made tremendous efforts in somehow trying to find a solution for this problem faced by young girls across the country,' Justice Anand Venkatesh said. This lengthy exercise undertaken by Delhi high court must be followed up by the authorities, since it is the duty of the state to safeguard the fundamental rights of its citizens. It is only the Union authorities who are vested with the power, even as per their own stand taken before Delhi high court, to initiate action under the IT Act for the removal of the contents from the internet and social media platforms, he added. In order to create awareness among the Tamil Nadu police, the court suo motu impleaded the DGP as a party respondent to the petition. The court then adjourned the hearing to July 14 for reporting compliance.
Scroll.in
28-06-2025
- Politics
- Scroll.in
Government need not suspect NGOs only because they receive foreign funds: Madras High Court
The government need not treat non-governmental organisations with suspicion merely because they receive foreign funding, the Madras High Court said on Friday. 'Just because some institutions run with the aid of foreign contribution, it is not necessary to look at the institutions like that of the petitioners with suspicion unless there are materials to show that such foreign contribution is being misused and it is being used against public interest/national interest,' the court said. Justice Anand Venkatesh said that several persons of Indian origin living abroad donate money to help India, and that alone should not raise concerns. The court was hearing a petition by two sister organisations, the Sharma Centre for Heritage Education and the Ellen Sharma Memorial Trust, challenging the Ministry of Home Affairs' decision to deny the renewal of their registration under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act. Non-profit organisations that wish to receive funds from abroad need to register themselves under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act. The trusts said that they had been working since 1982 to improve children's education and health and relied heavily on foreign donations for their work that includes setting up schools and health centres in and around Chennai. The government argued that the organisations had violated Foreign Contribution Regulation Act rules by moving funds among themselves without permission. However, the court found that the rejection letter did not clearly explain the reasons and that the trust had not been properly informed about the rule changes made in 2020. The court set aside the government's rejection and ordered the authorities to process the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act renewal application within four weeks. In 2020, the Union government amended the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act to extend tighter control over how non-profit organisations use foreign funds. Since then, several NGOs have alleged that the government has been using the law to target organisations they do not agree with. Among organisations whose licences under the Act were cancelled or not renewed were non-profits working on human rights, such as Oxfam India and Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, and think tanks such as Centre for Policy Research.
