Same Sex Marriage / Marriage Equality- Supreme Court Hearing-LIVE UPDATES

Vishwanath: Let me assume that by forming statutes they're giving some rights. Can you now discriminate? That's the question.

Vishwanathan: I am relying on the will of people. The will of people is the constitution. Your lordships have said so.

Justice Bhat: It's not inter faith, even inter caste marriages were banned in 1950s. Statutory intervention brought a change in 1954.

Justice Bhat: This hypothetical is very interactive to dwell upon in a 2023 court. But the fact remains that in 1950s court, fundamental rights were seen very differently. 

Vishwanathan: My lords would have found that right and found a corresponding obligation.

Vishwanathan: In 1950, when the constitution came into force, marriages were by personal laws. If an inter faith couple would have come to your lords and said I don't want to give up my religion, I want same status as people with personal laws.

Vishwanathan: The 1872 SMA which was repealed by 1954 SMA said that you must give up your religion.

Vishwanathan: I am going to establish a right and then put the duty independent of that.

Sr Adv KV Vishwanathan: I appear for Zainab Patel. More than the right to marry, is there a corresponding duty in the Union to recognise the association of non heterosexual couples as married couples in a non discriminatory manner?

Ramachandran: Even if you were to be giving only a constitutional declaration, the need for a protocol, whether it's protection under SMA or protection of a constitutional right, unless vulnerable couples are protected by a Shakti Vahini like protocol we won't get relief.