Same Sex Marriage- Supreme Court Constitution Bench Hearing-DAY-2- LIVE UPDATES
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...
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.
The bench has risen for the day.
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.
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.
Singhvi: The silence is being read in the counter and the stand of the government as a restriction.
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?
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.
Singhvi: The right is being questioned on the ground that the rights heterosexuals have, non heterosexual couples do not have.
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).
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.
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.