In a historical judgement, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has allowed inmates to have sex with their partners as long as they are married and want to have a child. [caption id=“attachment_1760677” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]
Representational Image. IBN.[/caption] The court on Tuesday ruled that the right of convicts and jail inmates to have conjugal visits or artificial insemination for progeny was a fundamental right.
Zee news q
uoted Justice Surya Kant as saying, “A society which is currently involved in academic and intellectual debates on ‘gay-rights’ or the recognition of ’third-gender’, cannot shy away nor can it keep concealed under the carpet the pragmatic concept of conjugal visits of the jail inmates. To say it differently, time has come and before it is too late, the stake-holders must sit together and deliberate upon this crucial subject and take a holistic view.” Unfortunately for one couple Jasvir Singh and Sonia - who are currently lodged in the Central Jail, Patiala, this observation was made after rejecting their plea to allow them to resume their sexual life for the sake of child birth. The couple were awarded the death penalty by a trial court for kidnapping and killing a 16-year-old boy of a well-to-do Hoshiarpur family for ransom. Jasvir Singh had pleaded with the court on account of being the only son of his parents and that the couple had been arrested in the case within eight months of their marriage,
reports the Times of India
. The seemingly forward judge held that right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution includes the right of convicts and jail inmates to have conjugal visits or artificial insemination as an alternative. He further augmented the case taking a broader view in light of the situation by saying, “A society which is currently involved in academic and intellectual debates on ‘gay-rights’ or the recognition of ’third-gender’, cannot shy away nor can it keep concealed under the carpet the pragmatic concept of conjugal visits of the jail inmates,” the court observed. “To say it differently, time has come and before it is too late, the stake-holders must sit together and deliberate upon this crucial subject and take a holistic view.”
)