The Constitution bench comprising of Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJ, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S. Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha J.J. is currently pronouncing its verdict in the matter seeking recognition for same-sex marriage.
The petitioners had sought recognition of same-sex marriages in the year 2022 under several acts, including the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (‘SMA 1954′), the Foreign Marriage Act, 1969 (‘FMA 1969′) and the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘HMA 1955′) and the same be made gender neutral.
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE VERDICT LIVE
I agree with Bhat, J’s reasoning on constitutionality of Regulation 5 of CARA – Narasimha, J.
A review of the impact of legislative framework on the flow of benefits requires a deliberative exercise. #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #LGBTQIA #CJIchandrachud #justicekaul #juctisebhat #justicenarasimha
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Justice Narasimha states that right to marriage not a fundamental right
Right to choose a spouse and the right to a consenting couple to be recognised within the institution of marriage cannot said to be restricted – Narasimha, J #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #LGBTQIA #CJIchandrachud #justicekaul #juctisebhat #justicenarasimha
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Right to choose a spouse and the right to a consenting couple to be recognised within the institution of marriage cannot said to be restricted – Narasimha, J #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #LGBTQIA #CJIchandrachud #justicekaul #juctisebhat #justicenarasimha
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Justice Narasimha begins delivering his judgment. Shows agreement with Bhat, J’s verdict.
The rights of LGBTIQ persons are the rights to gender identity, sexual orientation, right to chose partner, cohabit and enjoy physical and mental intimacy for these rights the State is bound give them full protection- Narasimha, J #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #LGBTQIA
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Conclusion and Directions by Justice Bhat:
- No unqualified right to marriage , except recognised by statute including the space left by custom
- An entitlement the right to union , or conferring legal status on queer relation can only be through enacted law. The Court cannot direct such regulatory framework
- Queer couples can celebrate their commitment with each other
- Previous Judgments have established that queer couple have right to union, this does not extend to right to claim legal status for the said union
- The union shall set up a high power committee chaired by cabinet secretary to undertake the comprehensive factors relating to queer committee
- State must ensure that queer community person are not subjected to any involuntary medical treatments
Justice Hima Kohli agrees with the opinion of Justice Bhat. #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality #LGBTQIA #justicebhat #cjichandrachud #justicekaul
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Key POINTERS on Justice Bhat’s judgment:
- The challenge to SMA is NOT MADE OUT
- Regulation 5 of CARA regulation cannot be held void
- Justice Hima Kohli agrees with the opinion of Justice Bhat.
Justice Bhat bats for facilitating choice of queer couples on part of the State.
The Court must exercise restrain in such policy centric matters – Bhat, J #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
To create an overarching obligation on State to facilitate through policies the fuller enjoyment of rights under Art 19 and 25 is not rooted in any past decisions or jurisprudence – Bhat, J#samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Bhat, J agrees with CJI Chandrachud on rights of trangenders to marry in heterosexual relations under the existing law, discusses challenges of recognition of same-sex marriage as against the existing social culture.
The purpose of terms like wife, husband, man and woman is to protect socially marginalised demography of individuals – Bhat, J #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Ordering a social institution, or rearranging the existing social structure by creating a new framework for queer couples will require a conception of an entirely different code – Bhat, J #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Justice Bhat elaborates context of ‘right to choose partner’
Referred judgments deal with broad observations on individual's choice for a partner but it cannot be asserted that there exists an unqualified right to marry which requires treatment as a fundamental freedom – Bhat, J #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
“What is being asked for is State’s intervention in enabling marriages for queer couples. Civil marriage or recognition of such relationship cannot exist in the absence of a statute.” ~ Justice S. Ravindra Bhat
Court has recognised that marriage is a social institution. Marriage as an institution prior to the State. Marriage structure exists regardless of the State. Its source is external which defines the boundaries of marriage – Bhat, J #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Justice S. Ravindra Bhat on evolution of institution of marriage.
State power to regulate marriage does not sit easy with the idea of marriage as a fundamental right. – Bhat, J #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Justice S. Ravindra Bhat begins delivering his judgment.
We do agree with the conclusions of CJI t hat There exist no fundamental right to marry under the Constitution; SMA is neither unconstitutional; Trangender persons have the right to solemnize marriage under existing law – Bhat, J #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Justice SK Kaul on recognition of Same-Sex Marriage
To create an edifice of governance that would give meaningful rights to these unions , whether termed as marriage of unions – Justice Kaul #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
To create an edifice of governance that would give meaningful rights to these unions , whether termed as marriage of unions – Justice Kaul #samesexmarriage #supremecourt #marriageequality
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Now that we have recognised the right to enter into civil unions such laws must be read in a manner to give effect to this right – Justice Kaul #samesexmarriage #supremecourt
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul begins delivering his verdict and disagrees with Justice Bhat, shows agreement with CJI DY Chandrachud’s judgment.
The intent of SMA was to facilitate interfaith marriage then there would be no rational nexus in excluding non heterosexual marriages – Justice Kaul #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Conclusion of judgment by Justice DY Chandrachud on Marriage Equality:
- This court is vested with the authority to hear this case under Article 32
- Queer is a natural phenomenon
- No universal concept of marriage, it’s not static
- The Constitution does not expressly recognise fundamental right to marry. However, several facets of marital relationship are there in the Constitution
- SMA cannot be held unconstitutional
- The freedom of all persons including queer is protected by part 3 of the Constitution
- In Art 15(1), the word sex must be read to include sexual orientation
- Inter-sex persons have the right to marry under existing law including personal laws
- State must enable LGBTQ to exercise their rights under Constitution
- Unmarried couples including queer couples can jointly adopt child
- REG 5 of CARA read down to include queer couple
- The Union and State Governments should not discriminate against the rights of Queer community to form Unions.
3. Upon complaint ensure that queer person's freedom is not curtailed by their families.
4. Ensure due protection
5. preliminary enquiry to be conducted in case of FIRs against queer person. #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
9. State must enable lgbtq to exercise their rights under constitution
10. Unmarried couple including queer couple can jointly adopt child#samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
11. REG 5 of CARA read down to include queer couple
12. THE UNION GOVERNMENT AND STATE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT DISCRIMATAE THE RIGHT OF QUEER COMMUNITY TO FORM UNIONS #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
CJI Dr. DY Chandrachud’s directions to the Police:
3. Upon complaint ensure that queer person's freedom is not curtailed by their families.
4. Ensure due protection
5. preliminary enquiry to be conducted in case of FIRs against queer person. #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
CJI Dr. DY Chandrachud’s directions to the Government on obviate discrimination:
5. Doctors clinics for curing queer needs to be stopped
6. Mental health act must include LGBTQIA Community#samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Unmarried heterosexual couple has the option of marrying and adopting the child as per the CARA Regulation but this option is not available to Queer couples. CARA is violative of Article 15. ~ CJI DY Chandrachud
An adoptive child is the legitimate child of the adopting couple. The Child will be legitimate even if the relationship breaks- CJI Chandrachud #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt #cjidychandrachud
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
CJI DY Chandrachud on Welfare of a child vis-à-vis institution of marriage
There is no material on record to claim that only a married couple will be able to provide stability to a child – CJI Chandrachud #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt #cjidychandrachud #adoption
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Same-sex couples and the dilemma regarding adoption of a child illuminated by CJI DY Chandrachud.
The criteria must not exclude legislative policy. By precluding unmarried couple to adopt the child and allowing individual to adopt, CARA has overreached CJI Chandrachud #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt #cjidychandrachud
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
CJI Dr. Chandrachud explains the legal backing for right to recognition of same-sex marriages as per the Constitution of India.
The word sex in Article 15 takes in its ambit 'sexual orientation'. Any discrimination will violate Art 15 – CJI DY Chandrachud #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt #cjidychandrachud #marriageequalityverdict
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
“Many persons choose not to have life partners, this is by their choice. The meaning of liberty is the ability of choosing what one whishes to do and wishes to be. Each individual has the right to choose who he/ she wants to be with. Any form of discrimination has an impact on the queer couples” ~ CJI Chandrachud
There may be reasonable restrictions on this right. However, other than legally valid and binding restrictions the right to intimate associations must be unrestricted. – CJI Chandrachud #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt #justicechandrachud
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
“Whether a change should be brought to the legislative regime of the SMA if for the Parliament to determine.” ~ CJI Chandrachud
State needs to recognise the relationship with the instrument of law – CJI Chandrachud #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt #justicechandrachud
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
CJI Dr. DY Chandrachud explained that “If the Court hold Section 4 of special marriage act is unconstitutional and if the SMA is held void from excluding same sex marriage, it will take India back to the pre era.”
The institution of marriage has changed from time to time. the legislature has ultimately responded to the call for change. Marriage is not static, or unchanging institution – CJI Chandrachud #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt #justicechandrachud
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Dr. Justice DY Chandrachud dealt with the issue of judicial review and separation of powers. He added that “Power of Court to do judicial review is part of basic structure. The Constitution demands that Supreme court do judicial review.”
#Homosexuality is not solely an urban concept. To imagine queer person only in urban places is a mistake – CJI Chandrachud #samesexmarriage #marriageequality #supremecourt #justicechandrachud
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
The 5-judge Constitution Bench delivers 4 judgments in Marriage Equality Case. DY Chandrachud, CJ, S.K. Kaul, Bhat and Narasimha, JJ write separate judgments with a degree of agreement and a degree of disagreement.
5-judge Constitution Bench delivers 4 judgments in Marriage Equality Case. CJI Chandrachud, Kaul, Bhat and Narasimha, JJ write separate judgments with a degree of agreement and a degree of disagreement #SameSexMarriage #MarriageEquality #SupremeCourt #LGBTQIA
— SCC Online (@scconline_) October 17, 2023
Shubh Mangal website always ensure your safety. You can complete your registration with your information as – name, email, phone etc.