The Supreme Court on October 17, 2023 has ruled that there cannot be legal recognition for same-sex marriages. The ruling has been done by a 3-2 majority. As many as four judgments have been delivered along with crucial observations made by the apex court.
3:2 Split Decision on Same-Sex Marriage
- The verdict denies legal recognition for same-sex marriages.
- It affirms there is no constitutional or fundamental right to civil unions for same-sex couples.
- The Center is set to form a high-powered committee to investigate the concerns raised by same-sex couples.
- Additionally, the judgment disallows the right for queer couples to adopt jointly.
In a watershed moment for LGBTQ+ rights in India, the Supreme Court is in the process of announcing its verdict on the legal recognition of same-sex marriage today. Led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, the court upheld the rights of non-heterosexual unions, recognising them as civil unions. This historic verdict ensures that queer individuals are entitled to protection under the Indian Constitution.
Landmark rulings by the Supreme Court of India today
- Law cannot assume that only heterosexual couples can be good parents.This would amount to discrimination. So the adoption regulations are violative of the constitution for discrimination against queer couples.
- Right to enter into union cannot be restricted on the basis of sexual orientation
- Unmarried couples, including queer couples, can jointly adopt a child
CJI Chandrachud On Same-Sex Marriage
- Same-Sex Marriage Verdict: 'Queer & Unmarried Couples Can Adopt
- Homosexuality or queerness is not an urban concept or restricted to the upper classes of society
- Queer Couple Must Have Same Rights as Heterosexual Couples
- CJI DY Chandrachud issued directions to the police forbidding harassment of queer couples to interrogate their gender identity or sexual orientation. Queer persons cannot be forced to return to their families.
- When a police complaint is filed about families restricting the movement of queer persons to ensure their freedom is not curtailed.
The Court has directed the State, Union, and Union Territories to refrain from discriminating against queer people and grant them the benefits available to other couples. Additionally, a committee will be established to address issues such as ration cards, insurance facilities, medical consultations, and more for queer families.
Supreme Court Directives for Inclusive Society
- End discrimination against the queer community.
- Ensure equal access to goods and services.
- Raise public awareness of queer rights.
- Establish a dedicated hotline for queer support.
- Create safe houses for queer couples.
- Protect intersex children from unnecessary operations.
This ruling marks a significant step towards inclusivity and equality, emphasising that queerness transcends urban or elite boundaries. It affirms the fundamental right of queer individuals to form unions based on love and partnership, irrespective of their sexual orientation. We are still waiting for updates from the entire hearing.
CJI DY Chandrachud while pronouncing judgment said in Marriage Equality Case, popularly known as Same Sex Marriage. ‘It is not an English speaking man with a white collar man who can claim to be queer but equally a woman working in an agricultural job in a village.’
The highly anticipated judgment follows a marathon legal battle that saw 18 same-sex couples petitioning for the validation of their unions. This case could pave the way for substantial changes in the world's most populous democracy.
A five-judge bench, presided over by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and including Justices SK Kaul, SR Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha, heard the pleas extensively between April and May. Their order was reserved on May 12th, marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing struggle for LGBTQ+ rights.
The Argument for Recognition
The petitioners argued for equal rights, citing India's deeply rooted ‘marriage-based culture.’ They contended that same-sex couples deserve the same legal and social recognition enjoyed by heterosexual counterparts, including ‘spouse’ status in financial, banking, and insurance matters, medical and end-of-life decisions, inheritance, succession, and even adoption and surrogacy.
The crux of the argument revolved around the inclusion of same-sex couples under the Special Marriage Act, with the objective of registering their unions as ‘marriage.’
The Government's Opposition
The Indian government countered these pleas, asserting that such marriages were inconsistent with the traditional Indian family unit concept of a ‘husband, a wife, and children.’ They categorised these appeals as ‘urban elitist views’ and maintained that parliament, not the courts, should be the platform for deliberation on the matter.
CJI DY Chandrachud responded that queerness is not urban or elite. ‘Homosexuality or queerness is not an urban concept or restricted to the upper classes of society,’ said Chandrachud.
The LGBTQ+ Perspective
Members of India's LGBTQ+ community voiced their struggles and continued discrimination despite the Supreme Court's historic 2018 ruling decriminalizing gay sex. The absence of legal backing for same-sex marriages, they contended, violated their constitutional rights and relegated them to ‘second-class citizens.’
Supreme Court Overturns CARA Regulations, Grants Adoption Rights to Queer and Unmarried Couples.
The Supreme Court has invalidated the CARA (Central Adoption Resource Authority) regulation that previously barred queer and unmarried couples from adopting children.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Chandrachud, while delivering the verdict, emphasized that the distinction between married and unmarried couples lacked a rational connection to CARA's objectives. He asserted that there was no compelling evidence to support the notion that only married heterosexual couples could provide stability to a child.
He said Regulation 5(3) of the Central Adoption Resource Authority, which excludes queer couples from adoption, is violative of Article 15 of the Constitution. He added that ‘There is no material on record to prove that only a married heterosexual couple can provide stability to a child.’
This ruling has the potential to reshape Indian society and bring relief to countless LGBTQ+ individuals.
