| S. J. Mukhopadhaya | |
| Office: | Judge of the Supreme Court of India |
| Term Start: | 13 September 2011 |
| Term End: | 14 March 2015 |
| Birth Date: | 1950 3, df=yes |
| Alma Mater: | Magadh University Patna University |
Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya (15 March 1950) is a former justice of the Supreme Court of India.[1] He was also chair of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal from 1 June 2016 to 14 March 2020. He previously served as Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court and also served as acting Chief Justice at the Jharkhand High Court[2] and the Madras High Court.[3]
See main article: Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation.
A Supreme Court bench of justice G. S. Singhvi and Justice SJ Mukhopadhaya has upheld the Section 377 of India's penal code bans "sex against the order of nature", which is widely interpreted to mean homosexual sex. The judges stated that "a minuscule fraction of the country's population constitutes lesbians, gays, bisexuals or transgenders" and that the High Court had erroneously relied upon international precedents "in its anxiety to protect the so-called rights of LGBT persons". The United Nations human rights chief Navi Pillay voiced her disappointment at the re-criminalization of consensual same-sex relationships in India, calling it "a significant step backwards" for the country and Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon stressed the need for equality and opposed any discrimination against lesbians, gays and bisexuals. The decision is widely believed to be one of the lowest points of Indian Supreme Court jurisprudence.
In the Puttaswamy v. Union Of India case, the 9-judge bench commented on the verdict that the size of the population should have no barring on the protection of fundamental rights. The bench commented that the "so-called rights" implies an illusion, but the claims were grounded in the constitution.[4] Subsequently, the judgement was overturned by a 5-judge constitutional bench on 6 September 2018 in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India.[5]
In Lily Thomas v. Union of India a two-judge bench of Justice A. K. Patnaik and Justice Mukhopadhaya on 10 July 2013[6] ruled that any Member of Parliament (MP), Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) or Member of a Legislative Council (MLC) who is convicted of a crime and given a minimum of two years' imprisonment, loses membership of the House with immediate effect. This is in contrast to the earlier position, wherein convicted members held on to their seats until they exhausted all judicial remedy in lower court, High Court and the Supreme Court of India. Further, Section 8(4) of the Representation of the People Act, which allowed elected representatives three months to appeal their conviction,[7] was declared unconstitutional.[8]