Get Instant Loan up to ₹10 Lakh!
Same-Sex Marriage Verdict: A closer look at the opinions of all 5 judges
India's Supreme Court rules against same-sex marriage, calls for legislation.
Same-Sex Marriage Verdict: In a 3:2 decision, a five-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud ruled against granting constitutional validity to same-sex marriages.
The apex court stated that the matter should be addressed through legislation by Parliament. While Justice Chandrachud and Justice Kaul supported the recognition of these rights, their position was outvoted by the majority decision of the other three judges: Justice Bhatt, Justice Hima Kholi, and Justice Narisimbha.
The Constitution bench of the Supreme Court, consisting of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha, issued its judgment regarding various petitions concerning the marriage equality rights of the LGBTQIA community. Here are the opinions of the five judges:
- CJI DY Chandrachud
“Union Government will constitute a committee to decide the rights and entitlements of persons in queer unions. This Committee to consider to include queer couples as 'family' in ration cards, enabling queer couples to nominate for joint bank accounts, rights flowing from pension, gratuity etc. The Committee report to be looked at Union Government level,” said CJI Chandrachud.
Centre stated there would be a violation of the separation of powers, but the court's power for judicial review is also a part of the basic structure and sees that no organ acts in excess of the constitutional mandate," CJI added as reported by Bar and Bench.
2. Justice SK Kaul
While reading his opinion, Justice SK Kaul said, “I recognize this as civil unions. I agree with the judgment of CJI. It is not re integra for a constitutional court to uphold the rights and the court has been guided by constitutional morality and not social morality. These unions are to be recognized as a union to give partnership and love.”
3. Ravindra Bhat
While reading his opinion, Justice Ravindra Bhat said, “I agree queerness is not urban or elite. We do agree that there is no fundamental right to marry and that SMA is not unconstitutional and that words cannot be read into and that transgender persons has the right to marry under the prevalent laws.”
“We, along with Justice Narasimha disagreed. The choice of matrimony was not free and for much time marriage was seen as a medium to procreate.. And women were in subordinate positions without agency. Notions of equality were unheard of and all these underwent a radical change. Legislative activity aimed towards bringing gender parity has been there,” Bhat added as noted by Bar and Bench.
4. Hima Kohli
Justice Hima Kohli said she agreed with the view of Justice Ravindra Bhat.
5. Justice PS Narasimha
Justice PS Narasimha while reading his opinion said, “I agree with the opinion of Justice Bhat.”
The Bar and Bench reported Narasimha as saying, “Marriage equality for LGTBQIA never arose in this court and thus no precedent. Right of LGBTQIA is gender identity, right to sexual orientation, right to cohabit and they have full freedom in the same. No unqualified right to marriage and it is not a fundamental right. In my considered opinion, marriage is conditioned with legislative intervention.”
Catch all the Business News , Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.
MoreLess
First Published:17 Oct 2023, 02:21 PM IST
- Top Gainers
- Top Losers
- 52 Week High