- Saturday, March 01, 2025
By: Shubham Ghosh
The Narendra Modi government of India on Tuesday (18) once again opposed the country’s supreme court hearing requests seeking legal sanction to same-sex marriages, reiterating only the parliament can decide on the creation of a new social relationship.
India’s solicitor general Tushar Mehta, representing the government at the court, said those present in the proceedings do not represent the nation’s views and that the court must examine first whether it can hear the matter at all, NDTV reported.
His remarks came before a five-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, which was hearing the petitions that were termed by the government on Monday (17) as “mere urban elitist views”.
The bench comprises Justices SK Kaul, Ravindra Bat, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha.
According to Mehta, the parliament is the only constitutionally permissible forum to decide on creation of a new social relationship and said that they were still requesting whether it is for the courts to decide on their own.
At this, the chief justice said the court cannot be told how to make a decision and that it wants to hear the petitioner’s stand. He added that the arguments must focus only on the Special Marriage Act.
The top court will continue to hearing the petitioners’ arguments till Thursday (20).
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who was representing those seeking recognition of same-sex marriages, said the right to same-sex marriages should be allowed in view of court orders and the judgment that decriminalised homosexuality.
On the chief justice seeking to know their demands, Rohatgi sought that the Special Marriage Act should mention ‘spouse’ instead of man and woman. Arguing that the concept of marriages has changed, the senior advocate said under Domestic Violence Act, live-in relationships are also allowed.
“We seek a declaration that we have a right to get married. That right will be recognized by the state as under the Special Marriage Act and the marriage will be recognised by the state after declaration of this court. This is because even now we are stigmatized – even if we hold hands and walk. This is even after Article 377 judgment,” he said, as per NDTV.
“There is no absolute concept of a man or an absolute concept of a woman at all,” Chandrachud said after Mehta submitted that the Special Marriage Act’s intent has been for the relationship between a “biological male and biological female”.
“It’s not the question of what your genitals are. It’s far more complex, that’s the point. So even when Special Marriage Act says man and woman, the very notion of a man and a woman is not an absolute based on genitals,” the chief justice said, the report added.
