Last Updated on November 2, 2023 by News Desk
Issue: A review petition has been filed challenging the Supreme Court’s refusal to legalize same-sex marriages.
Facts of the Case: The Supreme Court has been petitioned to revisit its decision in Supriyo v. Union of India, which rejected to authorize same-sex marriages. The review petitioners contend that, although admitting the prejudice they experience, the verdict failed to give any legal protection to LGBT couples.
According to the review petition, the judgment is filled with flaws and inconsistencies. While acknowledging the petitioners’ sexual orientation discrimination, the Court did not take the required steps to prevent it, failing to fulfill its constitutional duty to gay Indians.
Arguments: Not Interpreting the Special Marriage Act Consistently with the Constitution: According to the review petition, the ruling incorrectly rejected the appeal that the Special Marriage Act, 1954, should be interpreted neutrally considering gender and sexual orientation. The petitioners argue that the statute is discriminatory since it excludes non-heterosexual couples from its purview.
Failure to Alleviate prejudice Against the Queer Community: Despite acknowledging that the state’s legal structure discriminates against the queer community, the verdict provided no redress to alleviate this prejudice. According to the petitioners, this is a violation of the Court’s constitutional responsibility.
Establishing No Fundamental Right to Marry Under the Constitution: The review petitioner claims that the ruling contradicts earlier decisions that affirmed the fundamental right to marry. They claim that the decision essentially denies LGBT Indians equal citizenship.
inability to Grant LGBT Couples the Right to Adopt Together: The petition underlines the judgment’s inability to address the adverse effect of adoption rules on LGBT persons, as well as the absence of adequate remedies.
Reasoning: The Court ruled that the Union of India would form a committee to investigate the rights and entitlements of people in gay unions without recognizing such relationships as “marriages.” The decision permitted LGBT couples to live without fear of assault, coercion, or intervention, but it did not legally recognize such partnerships as marriages. Transgender people in heterosexual partnerships were allowed the right to marry under current regulations, but the ability of queer couples to adopt children was refused in a 3:2 verdict.
Judgment: The Supreme Court’s original judgment refusing to legalize same-sex marriages and the subsequent review petition raise significant legal and constitutional questions about the recognition and protection of the rights of the LGBTQ+ community in India. The review petition calls for a reconsideration of the Court’s decision and seeks to establish the fundamental rights and legal protections of queer couples. This case underscores the ongoing struggle for equality and nondiscrimination in India’s legal framework and society.
Written By: Nikita Shankar @nikitaashankar
