Same-Sex Marriage- Supreme Court Constitution Bench Hearing -DAY-5

Bhat J: Various permutations possible when same-sex couple is also interfaith...Gives rise to complications in terms of application.

Katju: All aspects that arise before this court, are not clear today, will be settled eventually.

Katju: In terms of application of statutory application, S.21A will apply with same force that it does to heterosexual couple.

Katju: We also seek a negative declaration binding the state to not deny rights & obligations to married couples whose marriage has been solemnised under SMA, only on ground of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Katju: We seek first, a positive declaration that marriage solemnised under SMA & parties to such marriage will be entitled to all rights & obligations, notwithstanding gender identity & sexual orientation.

Katju: We ask that our differences are ameliorated by our inclusion under this one statute. A declaration would go a long way in easing work of courts below as they embark on statutory intepretation.

Katju: LGBTQ couples will come to courts with claims, as these issues arise, just as heterosexual couples have, from the time codification of matrimonial laws began. We are no different, and we ask for the right to not be different.

Katju: You cannot decide all questions today...gratuity, as Your Lordships did yesterday, pension...any number of benefits & obligations that flow from marriage. These are complex statutes. 

Advocate Arundhati Katju begins her argument. Notably, her partner and senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy argued for marriage equality yesterday.

Bhat J: No one else has outlined facts, if that is to be done, we would relegate...

Nundy : I am on constitutionality, the hardships are merely supportive argument.

Takes court through case law & concludes.

Nundy begins telling bench about OCI couple.

CJI DYChandrachud: Provision does not become suspect because it causes injustice in individual cases, have to be looked at from larger perspective.