Kirpal: Doctrine of reading in is not some form of finding original intention and giving effect to it. We don't have doctrine of original intent in our constitution. We have to ensure it's a living document.
Kirpal: It may end up being all, and I hope it does, but that doesn't mean we don't take the first step.
Kirpal: Question is can law countenance this. I would submit the moment heterosexual people have a right, you cannot say that we can't give you everything so well give you nothing.
Kirpal: The way SMA is operated today is any two persons can get married as long as they're heterosexual. There is clear discrimination on ground of sexual orientation
Adv Kirpal: We have to address the elephant in the room. In terms of workability of issue, question is how far and how much we have to go. It may mean a lot for us personally and for many other people. At the end of the day, someone has challenged the provisions of SMA alone.
Guruswamy concludes her arguments.
CJI Chandrachud: May I suggest one thing. We have placed our perspective on certain issues. You can deliberate on this and give us your note on this.
Guruswamy: The ability to have the choice is an act of Constitutional principle and 21A of SMA gives all couples that choice.
We don't ask for anything more than that.
Guruswamy: Those who wish to participate in this new definition of relationship can participate. Those who don't want to, need not. Within the community, there may be people who may not want to participate.