Same-Sex Marriage Case: A five-judge Constitution bench is hearing the petitions. (File)
New Delhi:
The Supreme Court begins hearing the requests seeking to legalise same-sex marriages, a petition that the Centre is vehemently opposing.
Yesterday, the government stated in court that only the Parliament can decide on the creation of a new social relationship.
The Centre today urged the Supreme Court that all states and Union Territories be made parties to the proceedings on the pleas seeking legal validation for same-sex marriages.
The Supreme Court had last year sought the Centre’s response to separate pleas moved by two gay couples seeking enforcement of their right to marry and a direction to the authorities concerned to register their marriages under the Special Marriage Act.
Here are the LIVE updates on the same-sex marriage case:
Get NDTV UpdatesTurn on notifications to receive alerts as this story develops.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: Society accepts what the law is… i gave example of widow remarriage act and law acted with alacrity.. and here we need to push the society to acknowledge us as equals in all respect because the constitution says so and the moral authority of this court is there.. this court enjoys public confidence.. the decrees will be violated of people do not have confidence. whether parliament follows the law or it does not… the society will follow the law laid down
This court cannot stop at annulling section 377 but grant us equal rights to marry like heterosexual couples so that we can live in society with dignity
Justice SK Kaul: Everything cannot change at once.. once its recognised then you are married and if people then do not recognise you as married then its a violation of our order if we agree with you…
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: But real benefits should flow..
Justice SK Kaul: If marriage is registered under 1954 act under same sex then it is a registered marriage and benefits will flow.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: Please see a chart that I have prepared
The court may be pleased to direct that all laws were benefits ought to flow for marriage couples for heterosexual relations also apply to same sex marriage couples.. we have spent in carefully drafting this… so that there is an explicit declaration.. if we succeed then we should get an explicit declaration
We are being buried under the pressure of the majority. Oh look they are in minority we are said.. it is not the law but it is the mindset which is bothering us in daily life
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: We are in a way revisiting something which has already been decided. We need to go at least ahead in some areas.. at least in areas where the law is secular and not touching personal laws.. like payment of gratuity act.. where pension is given only the basis of marriage.. judges pension is only given to spouse and if a same sex couple member becomes a judge someday then how will they get pension.. look at motor vehicles act.. pension act.. juvenile justice act provides for adoption and you cannot adopt unless you are married…
Justice Ravindra Bhat: When it comes to personal law this will also affect it.. this court will have to engage itself at a number of times.. the issue is we are not looking at is a whole but in a truncated matter.. thus for convenience we say ok under special marriage act.. but others who are not aware of this civil form of marriage they are denied this right.. if they choose their religion they are out of it and the connection with personal laws.. keep all this in mind
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: Instead of colonial legislation we can use the word colonial mindset. some parts of mindset remains even after the 377 judgment… whether you look at centre or state submissions…. so in a sum… wherever husband and wife is used make it gender neutral by using spouse and man & woman should be made persons… thus a large part of this will solve our projected interpretation of special marriage act and this must also apply to the acts across the spectrum…
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud: I think tomorrow was an overstatement by me
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: I have a suggestion…
Justice Kaul: We will not permit you to go here and there
Senior Advocate KV Vishwanathan: My submissions are limited to counter and additional counter by them including international jurisprudence
Advocate Arundhati Katju: We need to make submissions for the transgenders as well
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta: Before the petitioners start, I have placed one document on record. In continuation of my request that states be heard.. Union of India has written to all Chief Secretaries that their views could be given
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud: Excellent.. then states already know about it.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: I am challenging a central law and merely because a subject is in concurrent list it does mean states have to be joined.. insolvency was challenged before this court and that was in concurrent list as well.. but states were not joined
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud: You do not have to labour on this point
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: The letter was issued yesterday and notice was issued 5 months ago.. this could have been done earlier
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud: Let us go back to your submissions now
Constitution bench assembles for Day 2
Just In| Centre asks states to offer views on same-sex marriages within 10 days amid Supreme Court hearing on requests to validate it
