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

Rohatgi: Society accepts what the law is. Sometimes the law takes the lead and I gave you the example of the Hindu Widows Right to Remarry Act which came in 1800s. The society was not even ready till 1900s. There law acted with alacrity.

Rohatgi: We may be a miniscule minority but having the same rights, we're entitled to the same declaration.

Rohatgi takes the court through various judgements to solidify his submissions.

Rohatgi: The argument of the other side is that there is a biological man,a biological woman, their union will lead to procreation, that is the order of nature. In some ways we're revisiting it (Navtej Singh Johar).

Rohatgi: They're saying I'm abnormal. What is normal is the majority. But that's not the law, that's a mindset. The important thing is deconstructing the heteronormative framework- this is what I'm driving at.

Rohatgi: Yes. I'm not saying that all struggles will end. But I'm saying that if we succeed we should get an explicit declaration.

Justice Kaul: You're saying that you want a specific declaration. According to you, area of litigation shouldn't be so wide that it creates a problem. And though you're confining yourself to the SMA, you're saying that the consequences of marriage are that should be available.

Rohatgi: What I'm saying is that consequential effects will follow. Please see the declaration, we've carefully framed it.

(Reads declaration)

Rohatgi: I should get some real filtering down of the order of this court.

Rohatgi: I don't blame the 1954 Act. When it was framed, this is how it was. But we're 70 years down the lane now.

Justice Kaul: Everything can't change at once. Other changes will take some more time.