SC verdict on same sex marriages

Supreme Court Affirms Queer Couples Can Live-In, Marriage Legalization Rests with Parliament

The Supreme Court acknowledges queer individuals' right to select partners similar to heterosexual individuals but clarifies that marriage cannot be considered a fundamental right.

Picture source: wikimedia

The Supreme Court's recent ruling on same-sex marriage has brought several significant points to light. In a 3:2 verdict, the court emphasized various aspects while addressing the legal recognition of same-sex marriage in the country. The key takeaways from the judgment include:

1. Recognition of Rights: The Supreme Court affirmed that queer couples have the right to engage in live-in relationships, choose their partners, and enjoy the freedom of gender identity and sexual orientation.

2. Parliamentary Role: The court clarified that while individuals have these rights, the formal recognition of same-sex marriages should be determined by the Parliament. In essence, it is up to the state to ensure what the petitioners are seeking.

3. Civil Unions: Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul supported the idea of civil unions for same-sex couples, arguing that it aligns with the Constitution's provisions. However, Justices S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha disagreed on this matter.

4. Petitions: This verdict was issued in response to a batch of petitions advocating for the right to same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. The Constitution bench, consisting of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha, concluded the judgment after a ten-day hearing that began on April 18, 2023.

5. Non-recognition of Non-Heterosexual Marriages: The petitioners argued that the existing legal framework, including the Special Marriage Act 1954, Hindu Marriage Act 1955, and Foreign Marriage Act 1969, did not recognize non-heterosexual marriages. They deemed this non-recognition as discriminatory against the LGBTQIA+ community.

6. Adoption Rights: The Chief Justice asserted that same-sex couples have the right to adopt a child. The court recommended a panel chaired by the Cabinet Secretary, consisting of domain experts and members of the queer community, to address related issues. However, Justice Bhat disagreed with this opinion, emphasizing the need for a broader exploration of ensuring benefits for children in need of stable homes.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court's judgment can be summarized as follows:

1. Legal recognition of same-sex marriages is a matter for the legislature to decide.

2. The central government can establish a high-level panel to address issues faced by same-sex couples regarding insurance, PF, and pension, among other matters.

3. The court ruled that same-sex couples cannot adopt children.

The Chief Justice highlighted that there were four different judgments, with varying degrees of agreement and disagreement on the extent of legal recognition and fundamental rights. He also clarified that the doctrine of separation of powers does not prevent judicial review when safeguarding citizens' fundamental rights.

Furthermore, the judgment emphasized that queerness is not limited to urban or elite settings; it transcends caste, class, and socio-economic status. It is considered a fundamental right to choose one's partner and have that union recognized.

Regarding the Special Marriage Act, the court's stance was that it is for the Parliament to decide on potential changes, as judicial interference in legislative matters should be avoided. The judges acknowledged that transgenders can enter into heterosexual marriages under existing personal laws.

The Chief Justice provided specific directions to the Union Government, State Governments, and Union Territories, emphasizing the need to eliminate discrimination against the queer community, sensitize the public about queer rights, establish hotlines and safe houses for queer couples, and prevent forced operations and harassment related to sexual identity.

These are the key points from the Supreme Court's judgment on same-sex marriage.