Justice Kaul: With the decriminalisation which took place, obviously this was indirectly recognition that such a status can prevail. Once such status can prevail, logically different social ministries would have gone into a study how to tackle these other problems arising of this
CJI DY Chandrachud: ...that these cohabitation relationships, they must be recognised to ensure security, social welfare. And then these relationships will cease to be ostracized.
CJI DY Chandrachud: In that sense we're not going to marriage at all. The reason why we're trying to push you to this is because we take your point that court's remit is not to legislate. But short of that, our law has gone so far. What does the government want to do to ensure...
CJI DY Chandrachud: The old privy council principle - long cohabitation itself is a presumption of marriage. Why? In our parental times, where were the marriage certificates, registrations.
Justice Narasimha: When we say recognition, it may not always be recognition of marriage.
Justice Bhat: Recognition must be something which gives them benefits.
Justice Bhat: Legislation has gone this far as to recognise live in relationships- right to residence. So there can be situations where a person in live in relationship may get the same house. There is a recognition.
CJI Chandrachud: This case is much more difficult for us. These have linkages everywhere - adoption, maintenance, succession.
CJI DY Chandrachud: Vishakha doesn't deal with something which had interlinks with other things.
Justice Bhat: Domestic Violence Act was also enacted because of some movement. Then came the Transgender Act. So collaboration has been happening.
CJI DY Chandrachud: Despite the government's affidavit, we have a law such as the Transgender Act. Look at the vision of that legislation.
Justice Bhat: We had a vishakha - it was limited to its application to public sectors. Then it got assimilated and it's a wider act now.