In a swift course correction, the Rajasthan High Court has removed portions of a recent judgment that appeared to question the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment law, clarifying that the contentious remarks were included inadvertently. ⚖️
The development follows a ruling delivered at the Jodhpur bench in a case concerning the absence of reservation for transgender persons in education and public employment. In that judgment, an epilogue had expressed concern that conditioning legal recognition of gender identity on certification or administrative scrutiny could dilute what had earlier been recognised as an inherent aspect of personhood.
Upon revisiting the text, the Bench acknowledged that the controversial observations were neither necessary nor intended. In a subsequent order, the judges noted that, on re-reading the epilogue, it appeared that certain passages had been inserted “by mistake,” and directed that those portions be deleted from the judgment.
The original remarks had drawn attention because they reflected on the constitutional foundation laid down earlier—affirming that self-identification of gender forms part of dignity, autonomy and personal liberty protected under constitutional guarantees. The judgment had also emphasised that, even within a changed statutory framework, policy measures should preserve these protections and address the continuing marginalisation faced by transgender persons.
The comments were widely welcomed in some quarters, particularly among members of the transgender community. However, after an application was filed seeking clarification, the Court reconsidered the matter.
While declining the argument that the epilogue should not be treated as part of the judgment, the Bench nonetheless ordered that most of the critical observations be removed. The corrected version has since replaced the earlier one on the court’s official website. 📝
