The Supreme Court heard the arguments on a batch of petitions filed wherein seeking legal recognition for same-sex marriage. It has been argued before the court by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi that the test of popular acceptance is not enough to deny fundamental rights of one’s community. Thus, what about the stigma going on? The same can only be removed by a constitutional declaration.
Adding to it, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi stated before the court that the ‘Discrimination which is done on the basis of sexual orientation is deeply offensive to the dignity and to the self-worth of an individual.
The bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud in the case stated that the mandatory 30-day notice of a couple’s intention in order to marry under the Special Marriage Act being ‘unconstitutional’ in the eye of law. Therefore, even in the heterosexual marriage, wherein you have to give the notice and have people object to whether there should be a marriage or not is unconstitutional
It has also been noted by the CJI that the notion of a biological woman or man is not absolute and it being not a question of what your genitals are’, the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Government, while responding to the same stated that the Societal acceptance of any relationship is never dependent on either the legislation or the judgement and that the legislative intent of the legislature throughout has been a relationship which being between a biological man and a biological female.
Further, it has also been argued by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that weather the judiciary is the right forum to create new socio-legal rights through marriage.
Accordingly, the court will continue to hear the petitioners on Wednesday and Thursday and the government will begin the arguments next week.
