By Anuradha Gandhi, Isha Sharma and Rishabh Gupta
Introduction
The Parliament on March 25, 2026 passed the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026 (hereinafter referred to as “the Bill”) with the Lok Sabha approving it with a voice vote amid an Opposition walkout.[1] The Bill, now a statutory Act, seeks to redefine the category of transgender, removes the provision of self-perceived gender identity and excludes several socio-cultural identities as well as trans-masculine individuals from its ambit.[2]
Background of the Bill
The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026 was introduced in Lok Sabha on March 13, 2026 with the aim to amend the some of the core provisions of the earlier Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights Act), 2019 (hereinafter referred to as “2019 Act”)
What the government says?
The Statements of Objects and Reasons accompanying the Bill contends that the existing definition of “Transgender Person” under the 2019 is vague, thereby making it difficult to identify what it describes as “genuine oppressed persons” who are intended to benefit from targeted welfare measures.
The Officials are of the view that “Bill will ensure protection to only those who face discrimination due to biological issues and added that transgender people will continue to get legal recognition and protection. With Transgender Welfare Boards set up across 30 states, the Bill will bring administrative clarity and protect the rights of transgender persons”.[3]
Changes made in the Bill
| S.No. | Parameter | Position as per 2019 Act | Changes made in the Bill |
| 1 | Definition of Transgender Person | The 2019 Act defined Transgender Person as “a person whose gender does not match with the gender assigned to that person at birth and includes trans-man or trans-woman (whether or not such person has undergone Sex Reassignment Surgery or hormone therapy or laser therapy or such other therapy), person with intersex variations, genderqueer and person having such socio-cultural identities as kinner, hijra, aravani and jogta”[4] | The Bill now recognises –
· Persons with socio-cultural identities such as kinner, hijra, aravani and jogta, or eunuch, as well as person with intersex variations or congenital variation at birth such as primary sexual characteristics, external genitalia, chromosomal patterns, gonadal development, endogenous hormone production or response. · The Bill also includes persons who are forced through allurement, inducement, deceit or undue influence, either with or without consent, to outwardly present a transgender identity, by mutilation, emasculation, castration, amputation, or any surgical, chemical, or hormonal procedure or otherwise · However, it does not recognize persons with different sexual orientations or self-perceived sexual identities |
| 2 | Recognition of Gender Identity
|
Section 5 of the 2019 Act required a Transgender Person to submit an application to the concerned District Magistrate for issuing a certificate of identity as a Transgender Person by following the procedure as laid down under Section 6 of 2019 Act read with Rule 5 of Transgender Persons (Protection of Rules) 2020. | The Bill has proposed key changes to be adopted while issuing a certificate of identity as a Transgender Person under the 2019 Act.
· Bill has now amended Section 6 and has now made it mandatory that the District Magistrate shall issue certificate of identity after examining the recommendation of a designated Medical Board to be headed by Chief Medical Officer or a Deputy Chief Medical Officer. · Additionally, the District Officer may take the assistance of other medical experts if he considers it to be necessary. · Further, the Bill also provides that any person who receives the certificate of identity as a Transgender Person shall be entitled to change the first name in the birth certificate and all other official documents relating to the identity of such person.
|
| 3 | Failure to Recognize the Right of Self-Perceived Gender Identity
|
Post the NALSA Judgment[5] which bestowed the right of self-perceived gender identity to Transgender Persons within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution, the 2019 Act too recognized this right by including the same explicitly under section 4(2). | The Bill has now omitted section 4(2) thereby taking away the right the right of self-perceived gender identity to Transgender Persons. |
| 4 | Procedure After Gender Reassignment Surgery | To undergo a medical intervention towards a gender affirming procedure –
1. A Transgender Person was required to submit form 1 along with a certificate issued to that effect by a Medical superintendent or Chief Medical Officer of the concerned Medical Institution to the District Magistrate. 2. Pursuant to this procedure, the District Magistrate could issue a revised certificate of identity after verifying the genuineness of the medical certificate as per Section 7.
|
The Bill has now changed this procedure by incorporating a Medical Board in between.
· It has provided that, a District Magistrate can only issue a certificate after examining the recommendation of the Medical Board headed by either Chief Medical Officer or Deputy Chief Medical Officer as appointed by the Government. · It is also now mandatory for the medical institution to furnish details of such transgender person who applies for gender reassignment surgery to the District Magistrate.
|
| 5 | New Penal Provisions
|
Earlier the 2019 act only provided simple imprisonment upto 2 years with fine for offences such as bonded labour, denial of public access, forceful causation to leave households, and mental, physical, sexual or emotional abuse. | The Bill has now introduced additional offences and penalties with rigorous imprisonment upto life with heavy amounts of fine.
· Kidnapping or abducting persons and causing grievous bodily injury through mutilation, emasculation, castration or other procedures to force persons to assume a Transgender identity. · By force/threat/coercrion compels any person, child or transgender person to conduct outwardly as transgender against their will or engage in begging, servitude etc. |
Opposition Faced by the Bill by Rajasthan High Court
The Bill is facing severe backlash by various stakeholders and most prominently the Transgender Community since it abridges their right of self-identity. Recently, on March 31, 2026, the Rajasthan High Court while hearing a plea of a Transgender person challenging a 2023 notification issued by the State of Rajasthan by which the State declared transgender persons as “Other Backward Class” in Ganga Kumari v. State of Rajasthan and Others[6], has highlighted that, “the judgment was written on the premise laid down in NALSA vs. Union of India verdict in 2014, where the right to self-identity gender was recognized as part of dignity, autonomy and personal liberty under Articles 14,15,16 and 21 of the constitution. The subsequent amendment to the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, marks a departure from that said constitutional baseline. It is now proposed that legal recognition of gender identity shall be conditioned upon certification, scrutiny, or other forms of administrative endorsement. What was recognized by the Supreme Court as an inviolable aspect of personhood now risks being reduced to a contingent State-meditated entitlement
Implications of the Bill
- Exclusion of Identities
The Bill limits the definition of the Transgender Persons to who the state would recognize as Transgender Persons to biological and cultural mandates. This means the state would cease the right to choose one’s own gender identity, thus excluding a considerable amount of people for whom the legislation was framed i.e. trans-men, trans-women, gender queer and non-binary people. In fact, it has also excluded the options of a person to undergo a hormone therapy to change one’s sex. It thus fails to determine that sex may be physically determined, however, a gender identity is not.Highlighting on this issue, another plea has been filed in the Kerala High Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Bill. The Petitioner in this case was receiving hormonal therapy from a medical institution before the amendment. However, post-amendment, their treatment has been banned by the hospital citing the amended law. The Kerala High Court has thus asked the Central government to sought clarifications on the same. The Matter will be heard on April 10, 2026.[7]
- Direct Violation of Article 21 of the Constitution
The Amendment Bill’s removal of the right to self-perceived gender identity amounts to a direct violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. The Supreme Court in NALSA v. Union of India (2014) had explicitly recognized that the freedom to determine one’s own gender identity is an inseparable part of dignity, autonomy, and personhood. By conditioning recognition on medical certification and bureaucratic approval, the Bill strips transgender persons of this autonomy, reducing a fundamental right into a contingent state-controlled entitlement. This undermines the constitutional promise that every individual has the liberty to live with dignity and make intimate choices about their identity without undue interference from the State. - Breach of Privacy
The NLSA Judgment has established that the right to privacy under Article 21 of the constitution protects personal dignity, autonomy and identity of all individuals including Transgender Persons.[8] The Bill introduces a provision requiring medical institutions to mandatorily furnish details of individuals undergoing gender reassignment surgery to the concerned District Magistrate. However, under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, gender identity and medical records are classified as “Personal Information”. Processing such information requires explicit prior consent from the individual, along with robust safeguards to prevent unauthorized access or breaches. Accordingly, medical institutions would be obligated to obtain clear consent before disclosure and implement strict security protocols to ensure the protection of this data during transmission and storage. Without these safeguards, the provision risks violating both the statutory requirements of DPDP and the constitutional right to privacy. - Ambiguity of classification of gender identities
The organizational infrastructure has to provide for identities who are self-declared versus the ones squarely covered under the Bill The labour management policies which were awaiting an overhaul of gender neutrality approach to be ratified under law will now need to grapple with non-recognition under the law One such law affected is Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) and the thrust of gender neutral and gender inclusive governing policies. The governance under, Rule 10(8) of the Transgender Rules, 2020 which explicitly mandates that every educational institution must establish a separate committee for transgender persons to address harassment or discrimination will now have a limited purview. This requirement has also been reinforced by the Supreme Court in Binu Tamta v. High Court of Delhi, where the Court emphasized the need for regulatory bodies to extend protection to LGBTQIA+ communities against workplace sexual harassment.
Conclusion
The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026, is a complex piece of legislation that attempts to bring administrative clarity while also introducing stringent penal provisions to safeguard vulnerable individuals. On the positive side, the Bill rightly criminalizes grave offences such as kidnapping, mutilation, forced labour, denial of public access, and eviction from households, prescribing punishments that range from rigorous imprisonment to fines. These measures reflect a genuine effort to deter exploitation and violence against transgender persons and to uphold their dignity through enforceable legal protections.
At the same time, the Bill’s departure from the principle of self-perceived gender identity, as recognized by the Supreme Court in NALSA v. Union of India, raises serious concerns. While the penal provisions strengthen accountability, the narrowing of identity recognition excludes many within the gender spectrum, as the trends show it shall be subjected to judicial scrutiny at many levels..
[2] https://prsindia.org/files/bills_acts/bills_parliament/2026/Transgender_Bill_2026_Text.pdf
[4] Section 2(k) of Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights Act), 2019
[5] National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India {Writ Petition (Civil) no. 400 of 2012 dated April 15, 2014}
[6] D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1358/2025
[8] Para 67 of NALSA vs. UOI