CHENNAI, India — The Delhi High Court's recent ruling that decriminalized sex between two consenting men or women is widely seen in India as a move toward a healthier sexual climate. Though confined to Delhi now, the law could eventually be adopted by the country's other regions.

The Delhi ruling quashed a terribly archaic law, inherited from the British Raj, which termed gay sex "unnatural." The section of the law in question, 377, was culture-specific, having originated in Victorian England before being transported to the colonies. British rulers felt that Indians and, of course, other colonial subjects were not civilized enough — even too sexually perverse — to enjoy freedom. This line of thought stigmatized sex, most certainly homosexuality, and the legacy persists today.

In fact, India's religious institutions still aver that gay men and lesbian women are perverted. Often, homosexuality has been looked upon and treated as a form of mental illness or a rare case of lunacy by society at large. The legal system merely reinforced this through Section 377, under which an offense was punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

Although there have been few convictions in recent years, the law has given some policemen reason to humiliate, harass and torture gays and lesbians, already subjected to bias in the workplace and other social arenas.

The Delhi verdict came at the end of a long nine-year battle by activists who argued that the ban on gay sex violated a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution. They also said the ban made it more difficult to check the spread of sexual infection, particularly HIV and AIDS.

The new law goes beyond merely preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. It will open the door to sexual freedom, reducing the fear of being discovered by the authorities, and ultimately pave the way for greater social acceptance and a less stigma.

In a nation where sex between a consenting adult man and a woman is viewed as a right and a responsibility of society, the court order will help place the gay issue in its correct perspective. The right to privacy will now be as integral as the right to life.

For a long time, homosexuals have contended that their sexual preference and activity (provided it is consensual) is a private matter, that the community should have no say in it, and that people must be left alone to pursue their choice of partners. But their voice has remained a whisper, finding outlets only in poorly circulated magazines and patronized films. It is unfortunate that the prejudices of some were allowed to interfere and override the privacy and liberty of others.

The new law seeks to set this right; more important, it underlines that tolerating homosexual preference is not about morality but equality. For the first time in nearly 150 years, India's homosexuals will have rights equal to those of heterosexuals.

The Delhi court's remarks on equality will lead to the recognition of homosexuals' right to marry, nominate and inherit. It will also help define non-consensual sodomy. Pedophilia involving the same sex, which has so far been listed under Section 377, will probably fall under the purview of statutes dealing with rape.

In the final analysis, the legal step has taken India back to where it was in ancient times: sexual liberty with tolerance for sexual minorities.

Gayness was not a matter of guilt then; it was out in the open. Indian epics and mythology make innumerable references to sex between people of the same gender. One version of the Indian epic "Ramayana" describes two women making love in the absence of their husbands. Instances of sexual ambiguity can be found in the nation's literature, and are invariably narrated with empathy. The human mind has the capacity to include those of a different sexual orientation in society.

There is enough compassion to tolerate homosexuality, and it may not be a bad idea to complement the new law with better high school education on the matter. Undoubtedly, the media's role is significant. Although it played up the Delhi court decision, the court ruling should not mark the end of the effort.

Gautaman Bhaskaran is a Chennai, India-based journalist who writes for several newspapers across the world.