New Delhi: On Monday, the Supreme Court presented a series of legal grounds for the legal recognition of same-sex marriage to a constitutional court of five judges. The Supreme Court said the issue was of “fundamental importance”.
A bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala observed that the case involved the interplay between constitutional rights and special statutory provisions including the Special Marriage Act.
“We believe that, taking into account the provisions of Section 145 (3) of the Constitution, it would be appropriate to resolve the issues raised in a five-member judicial council. Thus, we will submit the case to a five-member council of constitutional judges,” said the council.
The Supreme Court will hear the case on April 18 and the proceedings will be broadcast live.
Appearing at the Centre, Attorney General Tushar Mehta said, “the right to love, expression and freedom of choice is already upheld and no one interferes with that right, but that does not mean the right to marry.”
He added: at the moment when marriage, as a recognized institution, is created between people of the same sex, it will be an issue of adoption, therefore the Parliament must see the issue of child psychology, which must be examined to see if it can be taken up in this way.
However, the council noted that an adopted child of a gay or lesbian couple does not have to be gay or lesbian.
Senior advocate KV Vishwanathan informed the SC that there is a law to protect transgender people, though the center has said it does not recognize such unions.
The court discussed a series of submissions in the case of same-sex marriage, which are in violation of Article III of the Constitution. 14, 15, 19 and 21.
Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the motions were related to fundamental rights issues.
The Center opposed the prayers in the petition on the grounds that such matters should be left to the legislature representing the will of the people.
The bench was pleased to set the hearing schedule for this set of petitions and directed that the matter be referred to the Honorable Constitutional Court under Article 145(3) of the Constitution.
One of the petitions was represented by senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Saurabh Kirpal, briefed by a team of lawyers from Karanjawala and Co.
Earlier, in an affidavit, the Center had opposed the plea seeking legal recognition of same-sex marriage, saying that same-sex cohabitation, now decriminalized, was not comparable to the Indian family and were clearly separate classes that could not be treated equally. .
The Center filed the affidavit contradicting various petitioners seeking legal recognition of same-sex marriage.
