Homosexuality can be defined as a sexual orientation characterized by a feeling of romantic love and sexual relationship between people of same-sex. Men who indulge in homosexual relationships are known as “Gay” and women with homosexual relationships are called “Lesbians”. Earlier marriage and sexual relationship laws only talked about the relationships between men and women only despite the gender-neutral language used by the statutes. However, in recent times there has been an increase in the number of jurisdictions regarding decriminalizing homosexuality and many countries around the globe have decriminalized it. But despite the protests by groups of individuals that laws in the country regarding homosexuality are obsolete and require amendment, it remains to be an act of criminal nature in many countries. These people are more likely to face discrimination, harassment, intolerance and they face homophobia (fear of expressing themselves as homosexuals). Due to their no-validity in many countries, they are denied many legal and economic benefits like employment benefits, health benefits, rights on the death of a partner like inheritance rights, etc. which heterosexual people may get. Heterosexual couples of India see homosexuals with disgust, contempt, and as degraded people. In this research paper, I have focused on the discrimination faced by homosexual couples and the position of their right to privacy in the context of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India judgment. I will be focusing on two theories of constitutional interpretation namely, Consequentialism and Purposive.