Insisting On Transgender Person To Produce "Gender Re-Assignment Certificate" For Passport Prima Facie Violates Article 21: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on Monday observed that the Passport Rues, insofar as they require a Transgender person to produce certificate of Gender Re-assignment Surgery, is prima facie in teeth of the Supreme Court's judgment in NALSA v. Union of India and is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.

A Bench led by Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi observed,

"You can't insist on somebody to undergo sex-change operation for that (passport) purpose. You can classify such persons as Transgender and then there can be a subclassification into Trans man, Trans female, whatever the orientation of the person is, whatever the person wants to declare himself or herself as...but where is the question of insistence on surgery? One person does not want to undergo surgery but identifies himself or herself as a male or female."

Justice Navin Chawla, also comprising the Bench, added,

"As per NALSA judgment, they have the right to decide their self-identified gender. That right was upheld. It means that a Transgender person will himself or herself decide the gender and you will abide by that. This insistence is violative of Article 21 right."

The remarks were made while hearing a public interest litigation, challenging Passport Rules, 1980 to the extent that it makes it mandatory for a Transgender to obtain a gender re-assignment certificate so that one could be re-issued a passport recognizing one as a "Male" or a "Female".

The plea has been moved by one Lasya Kahli Singh through advocates Siddharth Seem and Oindrila Sen, and it contends that insistence on sex reassignment surgery in order for an individual to identify or change their sex/gender is unnecessary and violative of the choice of the individual with respect to undergoing a surgical procedure to reflect the transition.

The Court has directed the concerned authority of the Central government to take specific instructions in this regard within a week, and has posted the matter for hearing on April 22.

(Story to be updated)