DEIB India Updates - June '25 Edition

Discover key legal insights and societal inclusion steps in DEI India Updates June 2025 Edition.

1. New Draft Rules on Digital Accessibility Released

   India has published draft rules to make digital platforms more accessible to persons with disabilities. These rules mark a major shift from voluntary guidelines to enforceable standards. Read our overview here.

   
   

2. In Suchit Narang v. State of Uttarakhand, the Uttarakhand High Court set aside the conviction, and 20-year sentence of a blind music teacher accused of raping minor students, citing denial of a fair trial. The Court found that case documents were not provided in Braille, the only script the accused could read, violating his rights under Section 12 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. Holding that this impaired his ability to understand charges and assist in his defence, the Court ordered a retrial after supplying the documents in an accessible format.

   
   

3. In Sravya Sindhuri v. Uttarakhand Public Service Commission, a petitioner with 100% visual impairment, has challenged a judicial recruitment notification excluding several benchmark disabilities. The plea argues this violates the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act and constitutional rights. It seeks broader disability inclusion, removal of domicile restrictions, and compliance with prior Supreme Court rulings on judicial diversity.

   
   

4. The Kerala High Court has allowed a couple’s plea to be named as ‘parents’ in their child’s birth certificate. Zahhad and Ziya Paval became parents in February 2023 and approached the court after the necessary government body misgendered them in the birth certificate as ‘father’ and mother’. Zahhad is a transman (assigned female at birth but identifies as a man) and Ziya Paval, is a transwoman (assigned male at birth but identifies as a woman). They are the first openly transgender couple in Kerala. This is a significant move by the High Court as the laws need to evolve with changing times. Read the Order here.

   
   

5. The Madras High Court in the case of MA v Superintendent of Police ruled that a lesbian woman has the liberty to live with her partner, affirming that marriage is not the sole means to form a family. In a habeas corpus petition, the court emphasized that LGBTQIA+ couples can constitute a family, recognizing the concept of "chosen families" within LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence. The bench also expressed discomfort with the term "queer," noting that homosexual orientations are natural and should not be labelled as "strange or odd." Click here to read more.

   
   

6. The Madras High Court held that a wife does not need her husband’s permission or signature to apply for a passport, criticising the Passport Authority’s insistence on such a requirement as "male supremacism". Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that such practices reflect a regressive mindset that treats married women as chattel. The Court emphasised that marriage does not strip a woman of her individuality or autonomy. The ruling came in response to a plea by a woman whose application was rejected due to a pending matrimonial dispute and her husband’s refusal to sign Form J. The Court directed the Passport Office to process and issue her passport within four weeks, subject to other formalities. Read the Order here.