News By R Rajgopalan
Supreme Court on same-sex marriages: The apex court’s constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud on Tuesday was unanimous that it is beyond the remit of courts to issue a positive direction to the legislature to accord legal recognition to same-sex marriages.
Supreme Court on same-sex marriages: The judges were also unanimous in giving a go ahead to a high-powered committee proposed by the Centre in May to examine the concerns of same-sex couples.
New Delhi, 17 Oct (City Times): Supreme Court on same-sex marriages: The Supreme Court has refused to grant recognition to same-sex marriages, holding that it is only for Parliament and state legislatures to give legal validation to such a concept.
It is beyond the remit of courts: SC bench
The apex court’s constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud on Tuesday was unanimous that it is beyond the remit of courts to issue a positive direction to the legislature to accord legal recognition to same-sex marriages.
The judges were also unanimous in giving a go ahead to a high-powered committee proposed by the Centre in May to examine the concerns of same-sex couples.(Supreme Court on same-sex marriages)
Queer couples have a right to cohabit
The judgments by the CJI and justices Kaul, Bhat and Narasimha also refused to annul the provisions of the Special Marriage Act (SMA) to include non-heterosexual couples within its fold, even as they declared that queer couples have a right to cohabit without any threat of violence.
The judges, however, differed in deciding how far the court could go with the majority of three judges rejecting the view that there can be a right to form civil unions.(Supreme Court on same-sex marriages)
Can’t be recognised as a fundamental right
The CJI and justice Kaul ruled in favour of recognising a right to form a civil union, but justices Bhat, Kohli and Narasimha stressed that there is no unqualified right to marriage under the statute and thus, it cannot be recognised as a fundamental right. (Supreme Court on same-sex marriages)
Right to marry not a fundamental right
When the right to marry is not a fundamental right but just a statutory one, the majority held that there cannot be a right to civil union that can be legally enforceable.
By the same majority, the court also held that non-heterosexual couples cannot be granted the right to jointly adopt a child.
There was also a marathon hearing that lasted ten days of intense arguments from both sides in March and April.
The court had at the time clarified that the remit of the proceedings would confine to legal validation of same-sex marriage within the fold of the Special Marriage Act (SMA).
Petitioners include same-sex couples, rights activists
The petitioners before the SC included same-sex couples, rights activists, social workers and several other organisations. They challenged the constitutionality of a raft of provisions of the SMA, Hindu Marriage Act, Foreign Marriage Act and other marriage laws on the ground that they deny same sex couples the right to marry under the existing legal framework.
Alternatively, the petitions requested the top court to read these provisions broadly so as to include same-sex marriage.
It is an apparent invasion of privacy
Some of the petitions also challenged the validity of a legal requirement under the SMA (Sections 5 to 8) to issue a 30-day public notice inviting objections to an intended marriage, terming it an apparent invasion of privacy.
Legal validation of same-sex marital unions will cause a “complete havoc” with the delicate balance of personal laws in the country, the Supreme Court said.
It maintained that Parliament has designed and framed the marriage laws in the country to recognise only the union of a man and a woman to be capable of legal sanction.
