Same-sex marriage verdict: Supreme Court grants equal rights to same-sex couples without legalizing marriage – Gudstory

He declared that it was the job of Parliament and state legislatures to legally recognize gay marriages. “We record the statement of the Solicitor General that the Central Government will constitute a committee to decide the rights and entitlements of persons in homosexual unions.”

He said, “Unlike the judgment of Justice Bhatt, the directions given in my judgment do not result in the creation of any institution but they give effect to the fundamental rights under Part 3 of the Constitution.”

“If a transgender person wants to marry a heterosexual person then such marriage will be recognized because one will be a man and the other will be a woman, a transgender man has the right to marry a woman, a transgender woman has the right to marry a man and a transgender woman Right to marry is there and the top court declared, transgender men can also marry and if not allowed it would be a violation of the Transgender Act.

“The principle of separation of powers cannot prevent courts from enforcing fundamental rights. This court cannot make law but can enforce law,” the CJI said, adding that homosexuality is not an urban elite concept.

“Gender queerness is not about status or affluence. The Chief Justice of India said, marriage cannot remain a static, stable or immutable institution.

He said, “I have dealt with the issue of judicial review and separation of powers, which means that each organ performs a separate function. Traditional theory does not animate the functioning of most modern democracies. The subtle workings of this principle work and an institutional cooperation guides the workings of the other hand.”

“The Center said that would violate the separation of powers, but the court’s power for judicial review is also part of the basic structure and see that no organ acts in excess of the constitutional mandate,” he said.

The CJI further said that the apex court cannot compel Parliament or state legislatures to create a new institution of marriage.

“The SMA cannot be held unconstitutional simply because it does not recognize same-sex marriage,” he said.

The Chief Justice of India said, “The SMA or other legal provisions cannot be redrafted to substitute ‘man’ and “woman” or “husband” and “wife”.. No judicial law can Is.”

DY Chandrachud said, “The right to enter the Union must be recognized by the State for the fulfillment of such right.”

“The right to intimate relations has been enshrined in several articles of the Constitution. One is Article 19(1)(e)… where one can settle anywhere and make his/her life, including the right to choose life partner… Right to life, dignity and privacy ensured under Article 21 Does. The right to intimacy stems from all this.. Choosing a life partner is an integral part of life and defines one’s identity. The ability to choose one’s partner goes to the root of the right to life and liberty under Article 21,” the judgment read.

CJI Chandrachud said that it is wrong to say that marriage is a static and immutable institution. He said that if the Special Marriage Act was abolished it would take the country back to the pre-independence era.

It is for Parliament to decide whether there is a need to change the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. This Court, he said, should be careful not to enter into legislative territory.

The top court struck down the CARA regulation barring gay and unmarried couples from adopting.

He clarified that his decision did not give any social or legal status or legal recognition to gay marriages, but ensured certain legitimate benefits for gay couples.

“In view of the hypothetical created by the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act..Thus all the benefits available to a legitimate child of a married couple will accrue to the child of an unmarried couple..No change in the relationship of an unmarried couple by further breakdown The situation of the child will not come,” he said.

The CJI also directed police officers not to harass gay couples and not force them to return to their parents. “Before registering an FIR against a gay couple in respect of their relationship, there should be a preliminary investigation.”

The petitioners have argued that same-sex couples should be given the same rights as any heterosexual couples, given spousal status in finance and insurance issues; Medical, inheritance and succession decisions.

“Exciting news! Mint is now on WhatsApp channels Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest financial information!” Click here!

Updated: October 17, 2023, 11:59 am IST