Topic: GS2 – Indian polity
- A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court ruled that only the legislature has the authority to recognize or regulate same-sex marriages, stating there’s no inherent right to marry.
- The Bench was unable to reach a consensus on granting legally recognized “civil union” status to same-sex couples, despite unanimous acknowledgment of the need to end discrimination against them.
- Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, in the minority opinion, asserted that queer individuals have a fundamental right to form relationships, and the State should legally recognize and provide benefits to such unions.
- Justices S.R. Bhat and Hima Kohli, in their majority opinion, stated that legal recognition of unions, similar to marriage or civil union, must come through enacted legislation.
What was the Supreme Court’s view:
- Supreme Court ruled that only the legislature has the authority to recognize or regulate same-sex marriages.
- The Supreme Court has said that it cannot legalize same-sex marriage or civil unions on its own.
- It is up to the Indian Parliament to pass a law to do that. However, the Court has also said that the government cannot discriminate against same-sex couples. They must be treated equally under the law.
Question: Discuss the Supreme Court’s judgment on same-sex marriage in India. Critically examine the implications of the judgment for the LGBTQ+ community and for the future of same-sex marriage in India.