Same Sex Marriage- Supreme Court Hearing Live

Sr Adv Kapil Sibal (for Jamiat-Ulema-i-Hind): We believe in the autonomy of individuals. I think people are entitled to have a relationship of whatever kind. That needs to be celebrated as that's where society is headed.

Dwivedi: I'm saying states are necessary parties and no adjudication should be done without issuing notices and impleading the states.

CJI DY Chandrachud: We'll consider that.

Dwivedi: The two unions are different, they're on different pedestals.

Justice Kaul: So your argument is that don't do this because it has various ramifications.

Dwivedi: Same sex is not a new phenomenon. It existed earlier too but they never claimed equality, they were never given equality. They have existed but not on an equal level.

Dwivedi: The core purpose was to perpetuate the human race. Without it, the relationship cannot exist.

Dwivedi: Marriage amongst heterosexuals is not the gift of law. It has been existing since rigveda. Manu smriti continued it.

Dwivedi: Heterosexual union is responsible for the perpetuation and very existence of human race. Without it society itself will not live. The other relationship exists merely because there is love etc- just one part of heterosexual union

Dwivedi: Navtej is not a final authority on complete equality between the relationships- one relationship which has being existing since time immemorial - heterosexual unions.

Sr Adv Rakesh Dwivedi: Many countries have had several enactments giving them rights. The first question is would this court be holding - because in Navtej you didn't grant absolute equality, you just made some observations...

SG Mehta: Entry 5, concurrent law is agnostic. It's the law of marriage. It's not Hindu, Muslim or Parsi. So I'm reiterating that my preliminary objection be taken first and you may issue notice to states.

CJI DY Chandrachud: We'll reflect on this lunch.