NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to test the validity of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026, as a bunch of petitions challenged the constitutionality of the new provisions annulling self-perceived gender identity of persons and stripping trans men and trans masculine identities of statutory recognition.Senior advocate A M Singhvi, leading a group of advocates including Shraddha Deshmukh, Jyana Kothari and Arundhati Katju, told a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi that the amended clauses directly breach SC’s 2014 judgment in NALSA case giving sanctity to right of self-determination of gender to the trans population.“NALSA judgment, which provided for self-identification and self-determination – is nullified by the legislature without removing its basis, which is impermissible,” Singhvi said.Justice Bagchi said, “Do not take NALSA judgment to that level. NALSA said self-determination is a facet of dignity. What the amendment has done is it changed the substratum of law based on which NALSA interpreted self-identification as part of Article 21. Instead of self-determination, it now provides for medical identification and verification prior to certification.”Singhvi said the overwhelming characteristic is man to woman and if one is undergoing hormone therapy to sync gender identity with the self-determined gender, the law criminalises it and hence would deprive them of that treatment.Solicitor general Tushar Mehta interjected and said, “What is criminalised is forceful change of gender through surgery. There are instances where children have been castrated. The law penalises forcible gender alterations.”The CJI-led bench asked whether there are any benefits or social welfare schemes under the Transgender Act for those classified as transgenders. Singhvi said there are no benefits for them but it allows them to have identity cards which ensures their inclusion in all welfare schemes.SC issued notice to Centre and states and sought their response in six weeks while posting further hearing before a 3-judge bench.
