📷 Image: The Hindu (via NewsData)
Politics
India Trust Files PIL to Overturn NALSA Judgment on Gender Recognition
✍️ The Hindu
🗓 29 Oct 2026, 03:43 PM
👁 5
The India chapter of a UK-based trust has filed a public interest litigation seeking to overturn the Supreme Court's NALSA judgment, which recognized gender identity as part of the constitutional right to dignity and freedom.
The Supreme Court’s 2022 NALSA judgment marked a landmark decision, affirming that legal recognition of gender identity falls under the constitutional right to dignity and freedom. The ruling was hailed by LGBTQ+ advocates as a significant step toward inclusivity.
In a move that could reverse this precedent, the India chapter of a UK-based trust has filed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the NALSA judgment. The trust argues that the court’s interpretation of the Constitution is overly expansive and that the decision is “grossly discriminatory” against biological females.
The PIL seeks to have the Supreme Court declare the NALSA judgment unconstitutional and to reinstate the previous legal framework that did not explicitly recognize gender identity as a protected category. The petition cites statutory provisions and constitutional clauses that, according to the trust, were misapplied in the original ruling.
If the court sides with the trust, it could roll back protections for transgender and non‑binary individuals, prompting a nationwide debate on the scope of constitutional rights and the role of the judiciary in shaping social policy.
In a move that could reverse this precedent, the India chapter of a UK-based trust has filed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the NALSA judgment. The trust argues that the court’s interpretation of the Constitution is overly expansive and that the decision is “grossly discriminatory” against biological females.
The PIL seeks to have the Supreme Court declare the NALSA judgment unconstitutional and to reinstate the previous legal framework that did not explicitly recognize gender identity as a protected category. The petition cites statutory provisions and constitutional clauses that, according to the trust, were misapplied in the original ruling.
If the court sides with the trust, it could roll back protections for transgender and non‑binary individuals, prompting a nationwide debate on the scope of constitutional rights and the role of the judiciary in shaping social policy.