On the fourth day of Supreme Court hearing the petitions challenging Section 377, Justice Manoj George who is representing two Christian Associations, presented his arguments in support of Section 377 saying that homosexuality offends religious sentiments. CJI responded by saying that one's dignity cannot be violated by another's sexual orientation.

George stated that words cannot be imported into statute and it is the job of Parliament to redraft, redraw or enact provisions. He said, "Anything which needs to be done to 377 in the manner sought by the petitioners should be left to the Parliament.". In response to which, Justice Rohinton Nariman said, "The moment we are convinced there is a violation of fundamental rights, we will strike it down and not leave it to the legislature."

Lawyer George added, "Section 377 makes the following classification, carnal intercourse within the order of nature and carnal intercourse against order of nature. This is a reasonable classification with an intelligible differentia. Consent is a word which is absolutely absent in Section 377, petitioners are saying this word has to be imported into the provision." Justice Rohinton Nariman rebutted to this point saying, "Original draft of IPC by Macaulay had a provision specifically dealing with consensual same sex activity and provided for lesser punishment."

The case is being heard by the newly reconstituted bench, headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra and comprises of Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra.They are examining the petitions claiming that the 2013 judgment was wrong. What is Section 377 of IPC? Know All About the Law on Homosexuality & LGBTQ Rights

Last week, Centre passed the buck on Supreme Court and said that the Constitutionality of 377 is to be decided by the Court. The Centre further added that it is okay with consensual acts between adults in private, but sought clarification on beastality. CJI Dipak Misra stated that constitutional questions cannot be decided by referendum when one lawyer argued that popular opinion should be examined to decide Section 377.

(The above story first appeared on LatestLY on Jul 17, 2018 01:22 PM IST. For more news and updates on politics, world, sports, entertainment and lifestyle, log on to our website latestly.com).