Same Sex Marriage- Supreme Court Constitution Bench Hearing-DAY-2- LIVE UPDATES

Update: 2023-04-19 04:47 GMT
story

A constitution bench of Supreme Court will continue hearing batch of petitions seeking legal recognition for same-sex marriage in India.On the first day of the hearings in the batch of petitions seeking legal recognition for same-sex marriage in India, the primary arguments raised before the Constitution bench of the Supreme Court pertained to marriage being a way to help assimilate...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

A constitution bench of Supreme Court will continue hearing batch of petitions seeking legal recognition for same-sex marriage in India.

On the first day of the hearings in the batch of petitions seeking legal recognition for same-sex marriage in India, the primary arguments raised before the Constitution bench of the Supreme Court pertained to marriage being a way to help assimilate queer individuals in the society better and end stigma against them.

The matter was heard by a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Ravindra Bhat, Justice Hima Kohli, and Justice PS Narasimha. 

Follow this thread for live updates.

Live Updates
2023-04-19 10:32 GMT

The bench has risen for the day.

2023-04-19 10:14 GMT

Singhvi: The third pillar is dignity. Dignity is "to treat everyone with equal concern and respect" and not to send a message that any individual is worth less because of their ascriptive characteristics.

2023-04-19 10:12 GMT

CJI DY Chandrachud: It is not so much as statutory silence as much as failure to enact a law.

Singhvi: More than failure to enact, they will not recognise.

2023-04-19 10:10 GMT

Singhvi: The silence is being read in the counter and the stand of the government as a restriction.

2023-04-19 10:10 GMT

Singhvi: If they can't do it for heterosexual couples because your lordships will undoubtedly hold it as an unreasonable restriction, how is it a reasonable restriction for me?

2023-04-19 10:10 GMT

Singhvi: The projection of the gender identity, which is a part of free speech, is inhibited by your stand which allows that right unfettered in heterosexual category.

2023-04-19 10:09 GMT

Singhvi: The right is being questioned on the ground that the rights heterosexuals have, non heterosexual couples do not have.

2023-04-19 10:07 GMT

Singhvi: Third and the last prong is the dignity point under A 21. This is actually intersection of 14 with 19(1)(a)- the right to express one's gender identity is being questioned by the State without a law under 19(2).

2023-04-19 10:06 GMT

Singhvi: Hypothetically, the very text of 19(2) doesn't make it easy to think of a law which can be made- it's a hypothetical argument made to show the contrast.

2023-04-19 10:06 GMT

Singhvi: If a law was made, which part of 19(2) can be relatable to when the core values of Constitution your lordships is discussing. 

Tags:    

Similar News