State can't get into people's pants: Listen to what trans/queer lawyers think of the Transgender Amendment Act

On March 30 this year, President of India Droupadi Murmu gave her assent to the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026, bringing into effect sweeping changes to the legal framework governing the recognition, rights and protection of transgender persons in India.

The new legislation has been met with criticism from opposition parties, LGBTQIA+ groups, lawyers and others. The criticism primarily relates to the removal of the right to self-identification and the requirement of medical certification, which directly conflict with the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) judgment of 2014.

Transgender rights groups and allies have been protesting the Bill since it was introduced on March 13.

In a cruel twist, the notification of the new law was published in the gazette on March 31, International Transgender Day of Visibility, a day meant to celebrate transgender and gender diverse people and raise awareness regarding the discrimination they face.

In the days following the Rajya Sabha's passing of the Bill, Bar & Bench's Giti Pratap did what the government did not do - spoke to trans and queer lawyers and activists. Some chose to speak off the record or stay anonymous. But every single person contacted was willing and eager to speak out in the hope that it may help the community in some way. 

This article contains edited excerpts from conversations with the following persons:

Kanmani R, a transwoman, activist and lawyer practicing in Chennai.

Padma Lakshmi, a transwoman lawyer practicing at the Kerala High Court. She is the first and until now, the only openly transgender lawyer in Kerala.

Gollapalli Kiranraj, a transman and 2022 law graduate practicing before courts in Telangana.

Katyayani Vishnupriya, who describes herself as a female of trans experience from inter-sex variation and a gender-diverse person, is an advocate practising at the Chhattisgarh High Court.

Prashant Bhaware, a queer person with disability, belonging to Ambedkarite Buddhist (SC) community, is a lawyer and socio-legal researcher.

All interviewees were certain about one thing: No one saw this legislation coming. No one in the trans community was asked or informed about it.

Neither were opposition parties, LGBTQIA+ groups, legal experts, or even the National Council of Transgender Persons (NCTP), a statutory body established with the express purpose to advise the government on policy, legislation and initiatives for transgender, intersex and gender-diverse individuals. Two members of the Council - Kalki Subramanium and Rituparna Neog - resigned from their posts the day the Rajya Sabha passed the Bill.

A committee set up by the Supreme Court to examine transgender rights post the NALSA judgment also seems to have been ignored. After the Bill was introduced, the committee, headed by retired Delhi High Court judge Justice Asha Menon, asked the Union government to withdraw the Bill.

Padma Lakshmi pointed out that Members of Parliament (MPs) alluded to tales of Lord Rama, not of the lived experiences of even a single trans citizen.

"The tale of Lord Rama’s vanvaas was mentioned by many MPs. In Kerala, there are at least 1,600 transgender persons. We would have been better served had they taken note of the life and story of a single transgender Indian citizen instead," she says.

Padma, who is active in trans and queer support groups in Kerala, also questions why the government chose to introduce and push this Act through with such urgency at this time.

"We are not even getting LPG now. There are so many things happening in the country. People are facing so many difficulties. What was the need for this Bill at this time? This was a complete shock to us," she says.

All interviewees stated that the community has been asking for compartmentalised horizontal reservations for transgender persons in education and employment. Only a few states have implemented such reservation despite the NALSA judgment calling for it over 12 years ago.

An outright ban on forced conversion therapy would also have served the entire LGBTQIA+ community.

Katyayani added that inter-sex persons have been seeking a ban on surgery on intersex infants. That too has been ignored in favour of clubbing inter-sex persons with transgender persons.

"Inter-sex is about biological sex traits. Transgender is about psyche. Inter-sex groups have been demanding that sexual reassignment surgery forcibly performed on inter-sex infants be banned. Inter-sex persons should have the right to chose what, if any, medical procedures they undergo, at an age where they can give their informed consent. The parliamentary committee report that considered the Bill very clearly recommended that the 2019 Act be renamed to Transgender Persons and Intersex Persons (Protection of Rights) Act."

The parliamentary discussion on the 2026 Act saw many MPs, mostly those aligned with the BJP government, repeatedly alluding to "fake" trans people.

Kanmani has a succinct response to this.

"There is really no fake or real trans person in this world. If you say you are a trans person, you are a trans person."

Prashant scoffed at the government's apparent attempt to say that cisgender persons have been pretending to be transgender so as to avail benefits.

"If you see the debate in parliament, you will find a rhetoric of what if they fake being transgender for welfare. We can already see that the welfare state is receding. Everything is being privatised, everything is being corporatised. So then what welfare are they talking about?"

The legislature's answer to this issue appears to be to strip trans people of their right to self-identification.

It doesn't merely ban self-identification in the future. The proviso to the definition of "transgender person" states that the category “shall not include, nor shall ever have been so included, persons with different sexual orientations and self-perceived sexual identities".

Those with transgender identification cards are now in a legal limbo by an amendment that seeks to retrospectively de-legitimise and erase their identity.

"We are in limbo, our future is uncertain. I will have to now join a Kinnar or Hijra community to be considered transgender. Most of the people you might speak to will fail to be considered transgender as per the amendment," Padma says.

As Katyayani says, the Act also conflates inter-sex persons with transgender persons. This forces inter-sex persons, many of whom identify as cis, to accept a transgender label to access basic benefits.

"Every intersex person is not a trans person. Every trans person is not a hijra person. Every inter-sex person is not hijra person. And there are 40 inter-sex variations. They have only included 5. And not every intersex person wants a transgender tag. Nothing about non-binary persons at all. There's nothing about gender diverse people at all."

Perhaps one of the most egregious features of the amendment is its explicit removal of transmen.

The 2026 Act renders transmen legally invisible, leaving them with no clear path to legal protection, employment quotas or healthcare benefits.

"Since every person possesses the right to life-and specifically, the right to live that life with equity, the current situation constitutes a blatant violation of Article 15. The exclusion of transmen itself makes this Act unconstitutional," Kiranraj says.

Now, unless you are part of the kinner, hijra, aravani or jogta communities, or a "eunuch" or a person with inter-sex variations, or were forcibly "castrated/mutilated" as a child, you must be certified as a transgender individual by a medical board.

This turn to medicalisation reinforces the idea that being trans is a diagnosis. It also effectively splits the community and its collective bargaining power, between those who are "certified" as trans and those who are "fake".

"Mental health care diagnosis should be as per international guidelines. International standards very clearly say that trans persons are not a diagnosis. So this is a violation of the Mental Healthcare Act brought out by this government itself," Kanmani says.

Apart from that, this system of requiring a medical board to be set up to certify transness is impractical in a country like India.

"Medical boards are being made gatekeepers. It will be dehumanising for trans people to face clinical environments just to get the basic ID cards...The government will decide who is trans who is not? Where does the government have time and money for all this?" Katyayani asks.

Besides, gender affirming care is prohibitively expensive for most Indians. According to Padma, top surgery for a trans woman costs at least ₹75,000 and bottom surgery costs at least ₹2.5 lakh in Kerala.

"Even with support from family, that is unaffordable for most people," she says.

The 2026 Act also mandates that hospitals report on gender affirming surgeries. The State is effectively destroying patient-doctor confidentiality and violating the most basic aspects of the Right to Privacy.

Trans and queer people have a rightful distrust of the medical community - one informed by centuries of non consensual experimentation.

"The people who support this bill will say, 'what is the problem in going to a medical doctor?' Doctors can also be transphobic. Educating them about it will be a process. You are now sitting and saying that everyone else's bias will decide trans persons' lives," Kanmani said.

Prashant also points out,

"They are saying let me, the State, decide who is marginalised enough for me to give them this benefit, who is the perfect victim."

With the 2026 amendment, the government has handed the community a legislative U-turn that will undo years of progress.

To the transgender community, the 2026 Act is nothing but a reincarnation of the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871. During British rule, the colonial government viewed gender-diverse groups, specifically the hijra community, as "hereditary criminals". The 1871 Act enforced mandatory registration and it allowed the police to forcibly inspect "suspected eunuchs" to check for castration.

Now, in 2026, the baton has merely been replaced with a stethoscope, and a police station with a medical clinic.

The two laws are similar also for their justification for criminalisation.

In 1871, the British claimed Hijras were "habitual kidnappers" of male children. In 2026, the amendment introduces life imprisonment for "coercing" or "alluring" someone into a transgender identity.

This kind of vague language can be used to dismantle traditional networks and target NGOs that provide care for disenfranchised gender queer persons.

In both eras, the narrative of "protecting the innocent" is used to isolate trans people from their support systems.

"The 2026 Act is creating two groups of offences. One, forcing a person to be a transgender person by conduct. But what does that mean? They have listed out dress, presentation, walking, begging, all that. Boss, are these the markers and identifiers that you have in your head for a transgender person?" Kanmani asks. 

The second offence created is for "forcing" someone to be transgender by way of some kind of medical procedure, mutilation or castration.

"What data is this based on? There is no crime records bureau data. When did the Law Commission of India make recommendation like that? When did the National Council of Transgender Persons make a recommendation like that? Who made the recommendation that the government of the day has taken a huge call like this to create an offence where there none existed?" Kanmani asks.

Prashant does not believe this backslide came out of nowhere. In fact, it is rooted in the caste system and Brahmanical social hierarchy which seeks to enforce heteronormativity and the gender binary to perpetuate itself.

"A person who falls outside the gender binary cannot contribute to caste endogamy. This was supported by colonial intervention through the Criminal Tribes Act. There was progress more recently, especially with judicial interventions like the NALSA judgment. But political will comes from society. Given the electoral politics, which is currently dominated by Hindu nationalist ideology and the BJP, it is not difficult to understand why this is happening."

Kanmani also theorises that the new Act may have been brought about so as to avoid implementing the old one.

"It's like, this species is so diverse, the government doesn't want to deal with it and would rather unsee it and not recognise this as a group of people that they want to actually take care of."

To justify its move, the government has strategically alluded to Hindu mythology. During parliamentary discussions, MPs invoked ancient texts and deities to frame the amendment as a reaffirmation of traditional values.

Katyayani rips into the lack of propriety and accuracy on the part of the MPs.

"They were using references from Mahabharata in the parliament debates.  That is a constitutional space. What kind of arguments are these?

"You quote the story of Shikhandi in parliament. Shikhandi was a trans man and trans men are invisible in this Act.  In parliament, they referred to Lord Rama’s blessing to the Kinnar community and said the Kinnar community was neither male nor female. Who testified that? Which medical board was appointed? They gave examples from the Hindu scripture of which they themselves are not aware. They are not Shastris but they are giving Shastrarth," Katyayani continues.

Padma adds that this reflects the government's idea of what space a transgender person deserves to take up in society.

"In the Rajya Sabha, they said that a curse from a transgender person would be dangerous. That is their mindset. They think we are here for blessings and curses. They don’t see us as humans even. According to them, we are meant for blessing, begging and dancing. Whatever we did according to the Puranas, is what they want us to continue doing. Nothing else."

Kiranraj adds,

"How can they now expect to receive the blessings of the transgender community today? There are over 5 lakh transgender individuals living in India and this Act serves the interests of absolutely no one. This Act will even undermine the authority and standing of our revered Gurus and Matas - our spiritual leaders and matriarchs."

A significant part of the transgender community lives with marginalisation and multiple levels, including economic vulnerability. The focus on medicalisation will only push them further into debt traps.

"This Bill is putting trans persons in a precarious situation where they will get into even more of a debt trap, because you are telling them if you don't put a needle to your body, you are not a trans person. You're financially ruining a community," Kanmani says.

The increased criminalisation will empower people to attack any support system that a trans person might have, whether it's a parent, friend, activist, an NGO, a surgeon or a medical professional. All it takes is one bad neighbour, one bad cop, one bad employer, to ruin a trans person's life.

"Trans people are not most people's neighbours. We are not the guests at your birthday. We are, of course, guests at the birth of your baby. After the first birthday, the trans person is out. How would, how can we expect a fair evaluation from you?" Kanmani adds.

Kiranraj also points out that with the erasure of trans men, corrective rape and forced marriages, the latter, which he himself experienced, will be on the rise.

Padma says that since the Act was introduced in parliament, some transgender sex workers have reached out to her.

"They told me told me that verbal abuse against them has been on an uptick and that many threaten them with the fact that they will not have any protections in the future. If you go on social media, it is rife with cyberbullying against trans people."

The coming months and perhaps even years will be an uphill battle for the community. Loathe as she is to use the term 'battle', Kanmani says that this period will be precarious for members of her community, especially those who work in the informal sector.

And the community could use as much support from allies, now more than even.

"Unless allies and everyone step up and say that we are with you and we don't support this Bill and we will voice out against this and we will check in with you...Please speak up about the Bill both privately and publicly, as much as you can," Kanmani says.

All five interviewees were clear that legal responses to the Act must be co-ordinated. While others emphasise that any Supreme Court challenge would have to be a well thought-out move, Katyayani specifically advises that those eager to challenge it immediately ought to move High Courts first, especially South Indian High Courts.

"I personally suggest that the community should not go to the Supreme Court, they should go to the High Courts, especially those in the South. Because they're bound by NALSA," she says.

Kiranraj says that the community will take the matter all the way to the Supreme Court.

"The next ordinance proposed by the BJP must not be allowed to take effect in India. There are over 500,000 transgender individuals living in India—and this Act serves the interests of absolutely no one," he says.

He also says that raising awareness about the Act would also be a crucial step now.

"Whenever an Act is enacted, only lawyers are aware of it - and specifically, only those lawyers directly involved; no one else has any knowledge of it. A proper mechanism needs to be established to ensure this information reaches the public. Students in every college should be taught about transgender issues."

Prashant calls for co-ordination between progressive social movements.

"The labour movement, women's rights, anti-caste, all these progressive social movements need to find some common ground. Coordinated progressive social movements, political assertion and advancement of egalitarian politics is the need of the hour."

Padma has a specific request for media houses.

"Many media outlets are reporting that there is no need to recognise or protect us anymore. That then gets picked up by YouTube and other social media channels which sensationalise it and show transgender people as an aberration in society. That kind of propaganda and narrative is seriously affecting transgender people especially younger individuals. There are already cases of people attempting to take their own lives."

But she signs off on a positive note. The transgender community is building stronger bonds and they are organising.

"We are gathering as a community more. Either directly or at least on WhatsApp. We encourage each other. We provide a listening ear to each others’ worries. That is the only good thing that has come from this Bill," Padma says.