JUDGMENT :

Ravindra Maithani, J.

The journey passing through the Criminal Tribes’ Act, 1871, to the decision in the case of National Legal Services Authority Vs. Union of India, (2014) 5 SCC 438 (hereinafter referred to as ‘NALSA’s case) appears to have yet not ended. The Criminal Tribes’ Act was enacted for the registration, surveillance and controls of certain tribes and eunuchs. The broader term ‘Transgender’ (TG) and their rights have been interpreted, widely discussed and upheld in the NALSA’s case. Those whose ‘brain sex’ was not in conformity with their ‘biological sex’ got an expression of freedom, autonomy, identity and dignity by the NALSA’s case. The NALSA’s case, in fact, legally as well as for all practical purposes ends all kind of humiliation, agony, anguish, trauma, distress, etc. that could have been faced by TGs. But, this Court is faced with a situation, where the petitioner, a transsexual woman, who has undergone gender reassignment surgery (GRS) claims that she is ‘she’, but State is not recognising it. The petitioner is still raising her voice against the might of the State on the strength of her rights upheld in the NALSA’s case and subsequent to it, in the cas