Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body · Of Unnatural offences
Section 377: Unnatural offences
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation.—Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 377
-
Nazim & Ors. v. The State of Uttarakhand
Whether the prosecution has succeeded in establishing, beyond a reasonable doubt, a complete chain of circumstances leading only to the conclusion of guilt of the Appellants, or whether the circumstances leave room for…
-
Jai Prakash v. State of Uttarakhand
Allegation against the appellant herein that he committed a forceful rape and strangulated a 10 year old girl child. The punishment handed down to the appellant by the Courts below was of death penalty. Whether the…
-
Amol Bhagwan Nehul v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of order passed by the High Court dismissing the petition whereby the appellant sought quashing of criminal case against him that the appellant forcibly had sexual intercourse with…
-
IN RE: RECRUITMENT OF VISUALLY IMPAIRED IN JUDICIAL SERVICES versus
Whether visually impaired candidates can be said to be ‘not suitable’ for judicial service; Whether the amendment made in Rule 6A of Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994…
-
Rinku Baheti v. Sandesh Sharda
Issue arose whether the petitioner-wife is entitled to the transfer of the divorce petition; and whether this Court, upon the application filed by the respondent-husband, can exercise its powers u/Art. 142(1) of the…
-
involved and in I.R. Coelho v. State of T.N. [(1999) 7
(1) Whether Article 31C (as upheld in Kesavananda Bharati case) survives in the Constitution after amendment to the provision by the forty-second amendment was struck down by the Supreme Court in Minerva Mills case; and…
-
IN RE : SECTION 6A OF THE CITIZENSHIP ACT 1955 versus
Issue arose as regards the constitutional validity of s.6A of the Citizenship Act; does s.6A offend preambular values like fraternity; s.6A, if ultra vires Part II of the Constitution; does s.6A create an unreasonable…
-
Sukanya Shantha v. Union of India & Ors.
Matter pertains to caste-based discrimination in the prisons in the country.
-
Just Rights for Children Alliance & Anr. v. S. Harish & Ors.
What is the scope of Section 15 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO); what is the underlying distinction between sub-section(s) (1), (2) and (3) respectively of the POCSO; whether, mere…
-
Nipun Malhotra v. Sony Pictures Films India Private Limited & Ors.
The appellant is a person with arthrogryposis and is aggrieved by the manner in which persons with disabilities have been portrayed in the movie titled ‘Aankh Micholi’. The appellant seeks guidelines against filmmakers,…
-
Navas @ Mulanavas v. State of Kerala
Appellant-accused was held guilty for the offences punishable u/ ss.302, 449, 309, IPC and sentenced accordingly. For the offence punishable u/s.302, IPC, he was sentenced to death. High Court confirmed the conviction,…
-
Association for Democratic Reforms & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
The matter pertains to the constitutional validity of the Electoral Bond Scheme which introduced anonymous financial contributions to political parties; as also the constitutional validity of the provisions of the…
- Union of India and Others v. Dilip Paul
- Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty & Anr. v. Union
- State of U.P. v. Sonu Kushwaha
- Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad v. State of
- Ravinder Singh v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
- Ramesh Chandra Sharma v. State of Uttar
- Rahul v. State of Delhi Ministry of Home Affairs & Anr.
- X v. The Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr
- Manoj Pratap Singh v. The State of Rajasthan
- Pappu v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
- Smruti Tukaram Badade v. State of Maharashtra & Anr
- Lochan Shrivas v. The State of Chhattisgarh
- State of Tamil Nadu & Anr. v. National South Indian River Interlinking Agriculturist Association
- State of Gujarat & Anr. v. Narayan @ Narayan Sai @ Mota Bhagwan Asaram @ Asumal Harpalani
- Lt. Col. Nitisha & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
- Anokhilal v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- H Manoharan v. State by Inspector of Police, Variety Hall Police Station, Coimbatore (Review Petition (Crl.) Nos.446-447 of 2019) in
- Ravi S/O Ashok Ghumare v. The State of Maharashtra
- Rajan v. The Home Secretary, Home Department of Tamil Nadu and Ors.
- Atma Ram & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan
- Aarish Asgar Qureshi v. Fareed Ahmed Qureshi & Anr.
- Dattatraya @ Datta Ambo Rokade v. The State of Maharashtra
- Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v. State of Maharashtra
- Mahender Chawla & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
- Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. v. Union of India Thr. Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice
- Justice K S Puttaswamy (Retd.), and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.
- Ms. Eera Through Dr. Manjula Krippendorf v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
- Mukesh & Anr. v. State for NCT of Delhi & Ors.
- Ramesh and Others v. State of Haryana
- Supreme Court Women Lawyers Association v. Union of India & Anr.
- Ved Mitier Gill v. Union Territory Administration, Chandigarh and Others
- National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India and Others
- Anil @ Anthony Arikswamy Joseph v. State of Maharashtra
- Suresh Kumar Koushal and Another v. Naz Foundation and Others
- Shankar Kisanrao Khade v. State of Maharashtra
- Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v. The State of Maharashtra
- Amit v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- Childline India Foundation & Anr. v. Allan John Waters & Ors.
- Pawan v. State of Uttaranchal
- Jameel v. State of Maharashtra
- State of Kerala v. Kurissum Moottil Antony
- Sakshi v. Union of India
- State, Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Sun Il and Another
- State of Haryana and Ors. v. Mohinder Singh
- Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar and Ors.
- State of Haryana v. Ghaseeta Ram
- Anll Kumar Mahsi v. Union of India and Anr.