In this piece for JURIST News, Tejaswini Kaushal, an undergraduate student at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow, India, dives into recent legal developments regarding transgender rights in India, and a recent ruling in the ‘Mrs X v the State of Karnataka’ case from 2024. 

Imagine a transgender woman in India fighting for years to have her name and gender correctly reflected in her birth certificate. Despite the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, explicitly granting this right, her request was repeatedly denied. How could such a basic request be refused when the law clearly supports it? This was the reality for one woman in Karnataka, who, after five years, finally saw justice when the Karnataka High Court stepped in to uphold her rights.

Forced Into a ‘Dual Life’: The Plight of a Transgender Woman

In the case of Ms. X vs State of Karnataka (2024), the petitioner, diagnosed with gender dysphoria, sought to have her gender and name updated on her birth certificate after undergoing sex-reassignment surgery. Gender dysphoria refers to a disconnect between one’s assigned gender at birth and their true gender identity, with the understanding of gender now recognized as a social construct, distinct from biological sex. The petitioner had already made changes to her Aadhaar card, driving license, and passport to reflect her true gender identity. However, when she applied for a similar change to her birth certificate, the Registrar of Birth and Deaths in Mangalore rejected the request.

The Registrar cited Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 read with Rule 11(4) of the Karnataka Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999, stating that changes to birth certificates were permissible only if the information was “erroneous” or entered “fraudulently or incorrectly” under. In response, the petitioner challenged the restrictive nature of Section 15 in the Karnataka High Court, arguing that it violated her rights under Articles 14 (right to equality), 15 (right against discrimination), 19(1)(a) (right to freedom of speech and expression), and 21 (right to live with dignity) of the Indian Constitution. She emphasized that the name is integral to one’s identity and that having official documents that conflicted with her true identity subjected her to the risk of harassment and discrimination. The state of Karnataka defended its position, asserting that the Registrar’s actions were bound by the provisions of the 1969 Act.

Special Laws versus General Laws: Upholding Transgender Rights

The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, empowers transgender individuals to obtain a “certificate of identity” as proof of their gender identity (Section 6), which can be revised following a sex-reassignment surgery (Section 7). The High Court observed that Sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 7 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, provide provisions for both a change in gender and a change in the first name on the birth certificate of a transgender person. These provisions stipulate that when a transgender person fulfills the necessary conditions set out in the Transgender Act, a revised birth certificate needs to be issued in accordance with Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969. This would allow the person to change their name and gender in all identity documents.

The Court further noted that the government must amend the 1969 Act and its associated rules to ensure they align with the provisions of the Transgender Act, ensuring effective implementation. Justice Suraj Govindaraj issued an order, stating that, in the absence of suitable amendments to the 1969 Act, the Registrar of Births and Deaths must process applications from transgender individuals that include certificates issued under Section 6 or 7 of the Transgender Act. The Registrar must update the birth or death records to reflect both the previous and the current name, incorporating details of the certificate issued under Sections 6 or 7 of the Transgender Act.

The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules, 2020, outlines the procedure for obtaining the certificate and includes “Birth Certificate” as one of the primary documents eligible for revision. Relying on these provisions and the 2020 Rules, the Karnataka High Court ruled that the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, being a “general law,” must conform to the Transgender Persons Act, a “special law.” In applying the legal principle of generalia specialibus non derogant (the special law prevails over the general), the court determined that the provisions of the 2019 Act must take precedence.

In addition, the Court ordered the local authorities in Karnataka to process the petitioner’s application within four weeks. The Karnataka Law Commission was also directed to propose necessary amendments to the 1969 Act and the related rules to ensure that the Transgender Act is effectively implemented in its true spirit.

Claiming One’s Identity: A Guide to Modifying Certificates for Transgender Persons

Under the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, individuals seeking a certificate of identity must follow the procedures set forth in the Transgender Persons Rules. For individuals whose gender identity was legally recognized prior to the enactment of the Act, there is no need to submit an application for a certificate, as their recognition is already valid.

As per the Rules, the process begins when the applicant submits an application to the District Magistrate (DM), which must include an affidavit affirming their gender identity. Upon submission, the DM processes the application and assigns an identification number to the applicant. Within 30 days, the DM will either issue the certificate of identity and a transgender identity card or reject the application, providing reasons for the rejection.

In cases where an individual has undergone sex-reassignment surgery, they can apply for a revised certificate of identity by presenting a medical certificate from the Medical Superintendent or Chief Medical Officer. The revised certificate must be issued within 15 days following this request.

A Wrong Righted: Justice Served after Half a Decade

After five years of waiting and relentless struggle, the Karnataka High Court’s ruling has righted a significant wrong. It not only recognizes the legal identity of a transgender woman but also reaffirms the dignity and rights of the transgender community in India. The court’s decision brings much-needed clarity, ensuring that the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, is upheld and that individuals no longer have to live with the disparity between their true identity and official records. This landmark judgment serves as a powerful reminder that justice, though delayed, can still prevail, offering hope to those whose rights have been overlooked for far too long.

Image: © JURIST (Neelabh Bist)