Same-Sex Marriage/Marriage Equality- Supreme Court Hearing- LIVE UPDATES - DAY-9

The bench rises for the day.

Rohatgi: So that way I steer clear of SMA. I have an affidavit, I can have a registration with that.

Rohatgi: A document of marriage by way of an affidavit between two parties that I take you as a spouse can be made under S 18 of the Registration Act.

Sr Adv Mukul Rohatgi: I wish to give a suggestion. If you agree to some part of SMA, then it is there. If you don't agree to SMA, your lordships grant us a declaration that we can marry. We require a state recognition, a document.

Singhvi: Just see the conclusion. It would not follow from this approach that non-heterosexual Hindu couples who marry under the SMA would be excluded from legal succession regimes altogether. 

Singhvi: Let me tell your lordships how i would respectfully submit a judgement can be written with 21A existing. And it certainly will not be a blog.

Justice Bhat: You may have that legislator's pen elsewhere. You can't persuade us here.

Justice Bhat: Then neither are we reading down, nor are we reading up, nor are we striking down 21A.

Singhvi: Let us say we keep 21A...

CJI DY Chandrachud: We're not writing a blog, we're writing a judgement.

Justice Bhat: Then there is a classification amongst the same sex couples. You're saying that those who fall in 21A- treat them differently, rest leave to ISA. You're actually sub classifying.

CJI DY Chandrachud: So non heterosexual couples will be governed exclusively by ISA?

Singhvi: There are two options - either it will all fall under ISA or your lordships can apply "spouse" and "person" interpretation for HSA.

Justice Bhat: So we come back to the old position. When it comes to same sex couples, we'll interpret in a particular manner.

Singhvi: Since Section 21A itself was introduced as an exception to the regime under Sections 19-21, of the issue of Section 21A would simply mean a reversion to the default regime of ISA.

Justice Kohli: Are we reading up or are we reading down?