What is the common examiner trap about Polity in UPSC exams?

They may ask if the BNS completely repealed Section 377 (False: IPC was repealed, and BNS omitted it, creating a lacuna). They may also confuse the 2018 SC judgment as striking down the entire section (False: it only decriminalized consensual acts among adults).

What should UPSC aspirants remember about Polity for Prelims?

1. Target this Data: BNS replaced IPC from July 1, 2024. 2. Target this Nodal Body: Delhi High Court (Bench: CJ D.K. Upadhyaya & Justice Tejas Karia). 3. Target this Legal Point: Section 377 IPC (post-2018 scope: non-consensual acts, offences against minors, bestiality).

PolitySocial Justice

Take AI Challenge ▸

News 0 of 24

Delhi HC Restores PIL on Legal Lacuna in BNS for Non-Consensual Unnatural Sex After IPC Repeal

Q: Which court has restored the PIL concerning the absence of a Section 377-like provision in the BNS?

Delhi High Court, The article explicitly states that the Delhi High Court restored the public interest litigation (PIL) on March 20, 2026. The bench comprised Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia.

Q: Consider the following statements regarding the news: 1. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) replaced the Indian Penal Code (IPC) from July 1, 2024. 2. The Supreme Court's 2018 judgment in Navtej Singh Johar case struck down Section 377 of the IPC in its entirety. 3. The petition argues that the absence of a specific provision in the BNS leaves victims of non-consensual unnatural sex without a legal remedy. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Both 1 and 3, Statement 1 is correct as per the article. Statement 2 is incorrect; the 2018 SC judgment decriminalized only consensual same-sex relations among adults, but Section 377 continued to apply to non-consensual acts, offences against minors, and bestiality. Statement 3 is the core argument of the PIL as mentioned in the article.

Q: On what date did the Delhi High Court originally dispose of the PIL with a direction to the Centre, as mentioned in the article?

August 28, 2024, The article states: 'The direction for consideration and taking a decision on the representation was issued by the court on August 28, 2024.' This is the date when the PIL was initially disposed of. March 20, 2026, is when it was restored.

Q: What is the primary concern raised by the PIL regarding the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)?

It creates a legal lacuna for prosecuting non-consensual unnatural sex., The article's central argument is that the BNS does not contain a provision equivalent to Section 377 of the IPC, which continued to apply to non-consensual acts after the 2018 SC verdict. This omission is highlighted as a 'legal lacuna' leaving victims without a specific criminal remedy.

Polity Social IssuesHIGH

Target:UPSC GS-IIMPSCSSC GATeachingPrelims HighMains MediumStatic GK Link

20 Mar 2026

~2 min

Source: The Hindu

Key Data:July 1, 2024August 28, 2024

Bodies:Delhi High Court

Practice MCQs from today's news ▸

~2 min · Quick mode

What This Article Covers

1.Delhi High Court restores a PIL arguing the BNS has a legal lacuna as it lacks a provision equivalent to Section 377 of the IPC for non-consensual unnatural sex.

2.The petition was originally disposed of in August 2024 with a direction to the Centre, but no decision was taken in over 1.5 years, prompting the court to restore it.

3.This case tests the completeness of the new criminal law framework and its protection for vulnerable groups, making it a potential Polity & Social Justice question.

The Big Picture

Prelims · HighMains · Medium

The Delhi High Court has revived a PIL highlighting a critical legal vacuum: the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) lacks a provision to criminalize non-consensual unnatural sex, which Section 377 of the IPC covered after the Supreme Court's 2018 decriminalization of consensual relations. This gap leaves victims, especially from the LGBTQ+ community, without a specific legal remedy, raising urgent questions about legislative intent and victim protection in the new criminal code.

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

BNS Replaced IPC FromJuly 1, 2024

Court Direction DateAugust 28, 2024

HC BenchChief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia

PetitionerGantavya Gulati

1-Minute Revision

›BNS Replaced IPC From: July 1, 2024
›Court Direction Date: August 28, 2024
›Target this Data: BNS replaced IPC from July 1, 2024.
›Target this Nodal Body: Delhi High Court (Bench: CJ D.K. Upadhyaya & Justice Tejas Karia).
›Target this Legal Point: Section 377 IPC (post-2018 scope: non-consensual acts, offences against minors, bestiality).

Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.

Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.

News Snapshot

⚖️

Legal Lacuna Identified

The BNS, which replaced the IPC, does not contain a provision criminalizing non-consensual unnatural sex, creating a protection gap.

🔄

Judicial Scrutiny Restored

Delhi HC restored a PIL after the Centre failed to decide on the petitioner's representation within a 'reasonable' period of 1.5 years.

🛡️

Impact on LGBTQ+ Community

The petition argues the absence of a specific provision leaves victims, especially from the LGBTQ+ community, without a criminal remedy.

Detailed Analysis & Strategic Depth

Context / Background

Section 377 of the IPC was partially read down by the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), decriminalizing consensual same-sex relations. However, it continued to apply to non-consensual acts, offences involving minors, and bestiality. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which replaced the IPC from July 1, 2024, omitted this provision entirely, leading to concerns about a legal vacuum for prosecuting specific forms of sexual assault.

Core Analysis & Implications

The PIL highlights a significant legislative oversight. The BNS contains provisions for sexual offences (like rape under Section 63) but they are gendered, typically protecting women. The absence of a gender-neutral provision for non-consensual 'unnatural' sex means cases where a man is assaulted by another man may lack a clear legal basis. This creates unequal protection under the law and could violate the right to equality (Article 14) and life with dignity (Article 21), especially for the LGBTQ+ community.

Future Outlook / Way Forward

The Delhi HC has sought an affidavit from the Centre on steps taken. The government's counsel termed it a 'sensitive issue' with stakeholder consultations. The way forward involves either a judicial interpretation to fill the gap, a legislative amendment to the BNS, or the formulation of specific rules. This case will test the responsiveness of the new criminal justice system to emerging jurisprudential needs post the IPC era.

Key Facts at a Glance

BNS Replaced IPC FromJuly 1, 2024

Court Direction DateAugust 28, 2024

HC BenchChief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia

PetitionerGantavya Gulati

You've read the full analysis. Now test your understanding.

Practice exam-style questions based on this article.

Q1Static LinkageEasyUPSC, SSC, State PSC

Which court has restored the PIL concerning the absence of a Section 377-like provision in the BNS?

Q2Statement-basedHardUPSC

Consider the following statements regarding the news:

1. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) replaced the Indian Penal Code (IPC) from July 1, 2024.

2. The Supreme Court's 2018 judgment in Navtej Singh Johar case struck down Section 377 of the IPC in its entirety.

3. The petition argues that the absence of a specific provision in the BNS leaves victims of non-consensual unnatural sex without a legal remedy.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3Data-centricMediumUPSC, SSC

On what date did the Delhi High Court originally dispose of the PIL with a direction to the Centre, as mentioned in the article?

Q4Application/ImpactMediumUPSC, State PSC

What is the primary concern raised by the PIL regarding the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)?

All 25 MCQs ▸

Read original article from The Hindu

You finished this topic

Practice 3 MCQs from this news Next Article

Explore Related Topics

PolityView Topic MCQs →Social IssuesView Topic MCQs →

Next Strait of Hormuz Blocked Affects 40-90% of India's Fuel Imports, NATO Article 5 Rift Emerges, 7 Foreign Nationals Arrested on Terror Charges

Related Current Affairs

Polity Current Affairs

Delhi HC Releases 2 Life Convicts Citing Chekhov; SRB Rejection 'Arbitrary' Under Article 21

The Delhi High Court ordered the release of two life-term convicts, holding that prolonged imprisonment 'kills slowly' and that Sentence Review Boards cannot reject early release pleas based on stereotyped reasoning. The judgment reinforces Article 21 rights and sets important guidelines for evaluating post-conviction conduct.

Polity Current Affairs

Delhi HC Directs Formulation of SOP for Arresting Transgender Persons; NHRC Advisory 2.0 Referred

The Delhi High Court has directed the Centre and Delhi Police to formulate a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the arrest, detention, search, and interrogation of transgender persons, citing a critical legal vacuum. The court relied on the NHRC's 'Advisory for Ensuring the Welfare of Transgender Persons, 2.0' issued in May 2026, and highlighted a specific incident of rights violation. This is a key development for Polity & Social Justice syllabus, focusing on fundamental rights (Article 21), the Transgender Persons Act, and the role of NHRC.

Polity Current Affairs

Delhi HC Upholds NMC Rule Barring Foreign Medical Grads with Multi-College Degrees from FMGE

The Delhi High Court has upheld the National Medical Commission's decision to bar Indian students who obtained medical degrees after studying across multiple foreign institutions from appearing in the Foreign Medical Graduate Examination (FMGE). The court ruled that such 'fragmented education' compromises medical quality and is not in public interest, reinforcing the need for embassy attestation of foreign degrees.

Polity Current Affairs

Delhi HC Quashes Railway Board Decision, Upholds UDID Card for 45% Locomotor Disability

The Delhi High Court has set aside the Railway Board's cancellation of a UPSC ESE candidate's candidature, ruling that a valid UDID card certifying 45% locomotor disability cannot be overruled by a medical board. This judgment reinforces the legal sanctity of disability certificates under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and is a landmark for PwD recruitment in government services.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Rules BCI Cannot Discipline Law Students; Manipur Ethnic Violence Toll 306 Dead, 49 Missing Since 2023

A landmark Supreme Court ruling clarifies that the Bar Council of India (BCI) has no disciplinary authority over law students, limiting its powers under the Advocates Act, 1961 to registered advocates only. Meanwhile, Manipur's Home Minister disclosed in the Assembly that 306 people have been killed and 49 are missing in ethnic violence since May 2023. These two developments carry significant weight for UPSC Polity and Social Issues sections.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Upholds NCTE's Power for TEI Performance Reports; 450 B.Ed Colleges Show-Caused

Supreme Court upheld NCTE's power to require annual Performance Appraisal Reports from Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs), overturning a 2023 Delhi HC ruling. Amid quality concerns, West Bengal issued show-cause notices to 450 B.Ed colleges. This ruling strengthens regulatory oversight crucial for NEP 2020's teacher education reforms.

Polity Current Affairs

Health Ministry Backs Same-Sex Partners' Medical Decision Rights Under Mental Healthcare Act, 2017

The Union Health Ministry has told the Delhi High Court that excluding same-sex partners from making medical decisions for each other solely based on sexual orientation is unethical. This marks a significant administrative shift, though the government maintains that 'spouse' under Indian marriage laws only applies to heterosexual couples, creating a nuanced legal landscape for exam aspirants.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Upholds NCTE Notice: TEIs Must File Annual Appraisal Reports Under RTE Act

The Supreme Court has upheld the authority of the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) to require all Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) to file annual Performance Appraisal Reports. This judgment reinforces the regulatory power of NCTE, links the RTE Act's academic authority provisions, and expands the concept of 'duty-bearers' to include TEIs and NCTE itself. For exam aspirants, this is a key case in education governance, statutory interpretation, and fundamental rights.

Start Today's Quiz(25 Qs)

Take Today's Quiz

25 Qs • 5-7 Mins

Delhi HC Restores PIL on Legal Lacuna in BNS for Non-Consensual Unnatural Sex After IPC Repeal

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

1-Minute Revision

News Snapshot

Legal Lacuna Identified

Judicial Scrutiny Restored

Impact on LGBTQ+ Community

Detailed Analysis & Strategic Depth

Context / Background

Core Analysis & Implications

Future Outlook / Way Forward

Prelims Flashpoints

Key Facts at a Glance