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

Singhvi: As a proposition of law, am I entitled to come to your lordships and say that a. I have direct locus because I'm that class which is affected; b. I'm the class excluded because the exclusion occurs on ascriptive characteristics of sex, gender.

Singhvi: Classification which is invalid becomes valid by your lordships reading "spouse" "person" everywhere.

Singhvi: If your lordships within the bounds of judicial review, are able to read down something, does your lordships not uphold the act a hundred times?

Justice Bhat: You're not willing to take it that far because you have no locus.

Singhvi: Number one, I am entitled to challenge it on ground of discrimination and an arbitrary exclusion. But the consequence must be striked down.

Singhvi: I could enter the gate with a voidness challenge. Can I not ask for lesser?

Justice Bhat: It's not a question of lesser. You should be able to say this is wrong classification, I'm taking it head on, strike it down.

CJI DY Chandrachud: You're saying that in order to make it constitutionally compliant, read that social institution as also having within its fold same sex unions. That's very different from what we did in Navtej.

CJI DY Chandrachud: Your argument is that any notion of marriage as a social institution which excludes same sex couples would be violative of constitution preset. Their argument is that marriage is conventionally understood as a heterosexual union.

Singhvi: There is a value judgement in all these cases. Was Navtej not a value judgement?

CJI DY Chandrachud: No, no

Justice Bhat: Navtej- the court was within it's constitutional bounds.

Singhvi: Don't not do it because the legislature may not do it- that's not right. Please don't be swayed by this argument that elected legislature, unelected judges, majority - whole advance of laws is full of examples to the contrary.

Singhvi: Don't not do it because the legislature may not do it- that's not right. Please don't be swayed by this argument that elected legislature, unelected judges, majority - whole advance of laws is full of examples to the contrary.