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

Ramachandran: Therefore, whether your lordships grant us the prayer of declaration, it would be illusory subject to notice.

Ramachandran: Reiterating the facts of the society of clients- the Dalit girl and the OBC girl being hounded by their families- the argument was that notice provision would render illusory any right to marry. 

Justice Bhat: What was argued was that this is a legally recognised union and what you seek is that you should have similar legal recognition.

Ramachandran: I'm grateful.

Ramachandran: That should be the test, not the origin of the institution.

Ramachandran: This is in response to argument by Mr Dwivedi that marriage has always been viewed by society as man-woman union. My submission is that the real test to be applied is - is traditional reading of marriage as a man-woman union discriminatory against same sex couple?

Ramachandran: Religious personal laws will not be interfered with and Section 21A may be borne in mind in this connection.

Ramachandran: Gender specific laws concerning man and woman including penal laws, will not be subject to any interpretive exercise.

Ramachandran: Any provision which is wife specific under the SMA, will stand as it is without being subjected to any kind of interpretive exercise.

Ramachandran: In a heterosexual marriage under the SMA, each one of them will stand as they are because of the higher constitutional mandate of 15(3).

Ramachandran: This is when the court says that it is the protector of unpopular citizens, this is the situation where I'd ask the court to walk the full mile.