There are a total of nine Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed before the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court's order de-criminalizing homosexuality. On Monday, the Supreme Court admitted Petitioner number ten, Ram Murti, and tagged the case along with the other petitions, for hearing on September 29. There have been a wide range of concerns raised by the PILs on the consequences of the Delhi High Court's order.

The first petitioner challenging the order was astrologer S. K. Kaushal, who sought an interim stay of the High Court's order, on the grounds that "gay parlours" and "gay prostitution" were mushrooming in the aftermath of the judgement and there were also instances of same sex marriages taking place. B.P. Singhal, former BJP MP and noted Hindutva activist, also filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court. Singhal's counsel argued before the Supreme Court that the de-criminalization of homosexuality on the grounds of consent could have an adverse impact on the criminalization of various other offences such as gambling, adultery and incest. Singhal had also previously argued before the High Court that de-criminalizing gay sex would undermine family values in India and encourage 'group perversion', which he is convinced, the gay community indulges in.

The next set of petitions before the Supreme Court were filed by the Apostolic Churches alliance, and S. K. Tijariwala, a disciple of TV lifestyle guru Baba Ramdev. Baba Ramdev, incidentally, believes he can 'cure' homosexuality, and has accordingly set up a gay cure retreat on a remote Scottish island. The petitioners both argued that the High Court's order would lead to the legalization of prostitution, as well the breakdown of Indian family values and the moral fibre of society.

B. Krishna Bhat a resident of Bangalore, and a serial PIL activist, has also filed a petition against the order, as has Bhim Singh, Chairman of the J&K Panthers Party. Singh is quoted as having said that the order was against Indian ethos, and a 'cultural invasion.' The Times of India reports that Krishna Bhat's reasons for petitioning against the order include concern over the spread of venereal diseases, and social problems such as kidnapping [of young boys].

Amongst the last contenders is the Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights, which approached the Supreme Court on the grounds that homosexuality would adversely affect child rights. The Commission, in its petition, contends gay sex may have adverse impact on psychological, physical and mental development of children.

The respondents to these petitions are the Naz Foundation and Voices against 377. Anand Grover of the Lawyers Collective is representing the Naz Foundation, while Senior Counsels Anil Diwan and Shyam Diwan are appearing on behalf of Voices against 377.