Fri. Jun 21st, 2024


Same-Sex Marriage Case: A five-judge Constitution bench is hearing the petitions. (File)

New Delhi:

The Supreme Court begins hearing the requests seeking to legalise same-sex marriages, a petition that the Centre is vehemently opposing.

Yesterday, the government stated in court that only the Parliament can decide on the creation of a new social relationship.

The Centre today urged the Supreme Court that all states and Union Territories be made parties to the proceedings on the pleas seeking legal validation for same-sex marriages.

The Supreme Court had last year sought the Centre’s response to separate pleas moved by two gay couples seeking enforcement of their right to marry and a direction to the authorities concerned to register their marriages under the Special Marriage Act.

Here are the LIVE updates on the same-sex marriage case:

Get NDTV UpdatesTurn on notifications to receive alerts as this story develops.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: Every facet of life where we face pitfalls should end.. law must take positive steps.. state should come forward and say that they accept gracefully… in Navtej centre in affidavit had said that they leave it to the court.. but court commented on it that centre should have taken a stand.. decriminalising was the first step and affirmative steps remain which will help me lead a dignified life like any other person

You go to Khajurao and the sexual acts are depicted there for thousands of years. there is no european influence… it was in fact there since then.. society has existed in the shifting sands of time… British influence prevailed since they made the laws and those victorian model was imposed

You are dealing with something which is beyond the normal. it deals with the public confidence which wrests on this court

I have no representation in the parliament and that is why it is the courts we come to. Courts have always struck down the argument that even if one person is impacted then an action is struck down… in navtej also the miniscule minority point was overruled… if one mans fundamental right is affected he has a right to approach the court

Popular morality cannot defer the decisions of this court for the legislative process

Constitutional morality will become a habit for the people when the same is upheld by this very court.NALSA, Puttuswamy and Navteh was the groundwork laid down by this court already

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: Society accepts what the law is… i gave example of widow remarriage act and law acted with alacrity.. and here we need to push the society to acknowledge us as equals in all respect because the constitution says so and the moral authority of this court is there.. this court enjoys public confidence.. the decrees will be violated of people do not have confidence. whether parliament follows the law or it does not… the society will follow the law laid down

The petitioner i am appearing for has come out to his parents and the relationship was accepted by parents by even a reception was held by the parents of the boy… this is in a small town where this has happened with parents who are from the earlier generation

This court cannot stop at annulling section 377 but grant us equal rights to marry like heterosexual couples so that we can live in society with dignity

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: I am equal to heterosexual groups and it cannot be so that their sexual orientation is correct and all others are incorrect. I am saying let there be a positive affirmation and since we have been held to be equal starting for NALSA and Navtej then there should be marriage should be equal.. we will not be treated as lesser mortals and there will be full enjoyment of right to life.. you go to a school.. write parents name.. etc and all of this create issues.. concepts have evolved and i dont blame the special marriage act 1954.. but its been 74 years since then and society has evolved

Justice SK Kaul: Everything cannot change at once.. once its recognised then you are married and if people then do not recognise you as married then its a violation of our order if we agree with you…

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: But real benefits should flow..

Justice SK Kaul: If marriage is registered under 1954 act under same sex then it is a registered marriage and benefits will flow.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: Please see a chart that I have prepared

The court may be pleased to direct that all laws were benefits ought to flow for marriage couples for heterosexual relations also apply to same sex marriage couples.. we have spent in carefully drafting this… so that there is an explicit declaration.. if we succeed then we should get an explicit declaration

We are being buried under the pressure of the majority. Oh look they are in minority we are said.. it is not the law but it is the mindset which is bothering us in daily life

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: We are in a way revisiting something which has already been decided. We need to go at least ahead in some areas.. at least in areas where the law is secular and not touching personal laws.. like payment of gratuity act.. where pension is given only the basis of marriage.. judges pension is only given to spouse and if a same sex couple member becomes a judge someday then how will they get pension.. look at motor vehicles act.. pension act.. juvenile justice act provides for adoption and you cannot adopt unless you are married…

Justice Ravindra Bhat: When it comes to personal law this will also affect it.. this court will have to engage itself at a number of times.. the issue is we are not looking at is a whole but in a truncated matter.. thus for convenience we say ok under special marriage act.. but others who are not aware of this civil form of marriage they are denied this right.. if they choose their religion they are out of it and the connection with personal laws.. keep all this in mind

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: Instead of colonial legislation we can use the word colonial mindset. some parts of mindset remains even after the 377 judgment… whether you look at centre or state submissions…. so in a sum… wherever husband and wife is used make it gender neutral by using spouse and man & woman should be made persons… thus a large part of this will solve our projected interpretation of special marriage act and this must also apply to the acts across the spectrum…

Senior Advocate Anand Grover: We have been told to finish by tomorrow

Chief Justice DY Chandrachud: I think tomorrow was an overstatement by me

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: I have a suggestion…

Justice Kaul: We will not permit you to go here and there

Senior Advocate KV Vishwanathan: My submissions are limited to counter and additional counter by them including international jurisprudence

Advocate Arundhati Katju: We need to make submissions for the transgenders as well

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta: Before the petitioners start, I have placed one document on record. In continuation of my request that states be heard.. Union of India has written to all Chief Secretaries that their views could be given

Chief Justice DY Chandrachud: Excellent.. then states already know about it.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: I am challenging a central law and merely because a subject is in concurrent list it does mean states have to be joined.. insolvency was challenged before this court and that was in concurrent list as well.. but states were not joined

Chief Justice DY Chandrachud: You do not have to labour on this point

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: The letter was issued yesterday and notice was issued 5 months ago.. this could have been done earlier

Chief Justice DY Chandrachud: Let us go back to your submissions now

Constitution bench assembles for Day 2

Just In| Centre asks states to offer views on same-sex marriages within 10 days amid Supreme Court hearing on requests to validate it


Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *