A Decade After NALSA: Human Rights, Judicial Promises And The Path Ahead
- IJLLR Journal
- May 11
- 2 min read
Khushbu Maheshwari, Research Scholar, School of Law, Bennett University
Vardhman Jain, Research Scholar, School of Law, Bennett University
ABSTRACT
“Where after all do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home.”
– Eleanor Roosevelt
The Supreme Court of India has consistently served as a philosopher and guide to justice by interpreting the Constitution not merely as a legal document but as a living instrument for the welfare of the vulnerable class. This paper explores the transformative role of the judiciary through the lens of its landmark judgment pronounced in the case of NALSA v. Union of India (2014) which ultimately recognized the rights of the transgender community as fundamental to human dignity enshrined under articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The watershed moment in the constitutional journey of the country as it affirms the rights of the marginalized community which has been long subjected to systemic discrimination. The study critically examines the role of Supreme Court as a philosopher which articulates the moral and legal foundations of gender identity and on the other hand as a guide directing the state to enact meaningful reforms. Historically, transgender communities, particularly Hijras, were criminalized under colonial – era laws like the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871 which renders them excluded both socially and economically. The NALSA judgment sought to overturn this legacy by drawing upon India’s rich cultural history, where Hijras held respected positions in royal courts and religious texts as well as international human rights principles like the Yogyakarta Guidelines.
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar has always cautioned that the efficacy of constitutional guarantees depends on their implementation and a decade after NALSA judgment still the gaps persist. The judgment mandated legal recognition, healthcare access and anti-discrimination measures, the Transgender Persons Act of 2019 introduced regressive provisions such as medical certification for gender recognition which indirectly undermines the Court’s vision of self-identification. Empirical data, including the National Institute of Epidemiology’s report on violence against transgender individuals clearly reveals that state agencies particularly law enforcement agencies has remained to be the primary perpetrators of abuse. Heartrending narratives family violence underscores the chasm between legal recognition and societal acceptance. This paper argues that the Supreme Court’s philosophical guidance in NALSA must be matched by robust enforcement mechanisms. It proposes a judicial committee to oversight and monitor the compliance, legislative amendments to align the 2019 Act with NALSA’s spirit and community – driven awareness campaigns inspired by successful models of the states like Tamil Nadu’s Aravani Welfare Board. The study asserts that while NALSA is exemplified as an example of the Court’s capacity to uplift marginalized voices, its true achievement is contingent upon the gap between constitutional promise and lived reality being bridged, a challenge by which unified action is asked from the judiciary, legislature, and civil society
Keywords: Transgender Rights, NALSA Judgment, Human Rights, Supreme Court of India, Vulnerable Communities
