New Delhi: The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider on July 10 a series of petitions seeking review of its ruling last year that refused to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriage.
According to the July 10 cause list uploaded on the apex court's website, a five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud would consider in the bench the pleas seeking review of the October 17 verdict last year. .
According to practice, appeals for review are examined in chambers by courts of five judges.
Besides the CJI, the other members of the court will be Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Hima Kohli, B V Nagarathna and P S Narasimha.
In a setback for gay rights activists, the supreme court on October 17 last year refused to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriage, saying there was "no unconditional right" to marriage except of those who are recognized by law.
However, the apex court had made a strong call for the rights of queer people so that they do not face discrimination in accessing goods and services available to others, safe houses known as 'Garima Greh' in all districts to provide shelter for community members facing harassment and violence and dedicated hotline numbers they could use in case of problems.
Holding that transgender people in heterosexual relationships have the freedom and right to marry under existing legal provisions, the top court had said that the right to union, similar to marriage or civil union, or to confer legal status should be legally recognized to the relationship. It can only be done by "enacted law."
A five-judge constitutional bench headed by CJI Chandrachud had issued four separate verdicts on a batch of 21 petitions seeking legal sanction for same-sex marriages.
The five judges were unanimous in refusing to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act, noting that it was within the purview of Parliament to change the law to validate such a union.
While the CJI had written a separate 247-page verdict, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul (now retired) had written a 17-page judgment in which he broadly agreed with Justice Chandrachud's views.
Justice S. Ravindra Bhat (now retired), author of an 89-page judgment for himself and Justice Hima Kohli, disagreed with certain conclusions reached by the CJI, including the applicability of adoption rules for couples queer.
Justice PS Narasimha had said in his 13-page verdict that he completely agreed with the reasoning given and the conclusions arrived at by Justice Bhat.
The judges were unanimous in holding that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon and not an "urban or elite" phenomenon.
In his view, the CJI had recorded Attorney General Tushar Mehta's assurance that the Center will constitute a committee chaired by the cabinet secretary to define and elucidate the scope of rights of queer couples in union. .
LGBTQIA++ rights activists, who had won a major legal battle in 2018 in the Supreme Court that decriminalized consensual gay sex, had submitted to the high court the validation of same-sex marriage and consequent reliefs such as the rights to adoption and enrollment as parents in schools. , opening bank accounts and taking advantage of inheritance and insurance benefits.
Some of the petitioners had urged the apex court to use its full power, "prestige and moral authority" to pressure society to recognize such a union that would ensure LGBTQIA++ lead a "dignified" life like heterosexuals.
LGBTQIA++ means lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, pansexual, two-spirit, asexual and related people.
According to the July 10 cause list uploaded on the apex court's website, a five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud would consider in the bench the pleas seeking review of the October 17 verdict last year. .
According to practice, appeals for review are examined in chambers by courts of five judges.
Besides the CJI, the other members of the court will be Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Hima Kohli, B V Nagarathna and P S Narasimha.
In a setback for gay rights activists, the supreme court on October 17 last year refused to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriage, saying there was "no unconditional right" to marriage except of those who are recognized by law.
However, the apex court had made a strong call for the rights of queer people so that they do not face discrimination in accessing goods and services available to others, safe houses known as 'Garima Greh' in all districts to provide shelter for community members facing harassment and violence and dedicated hotline numbers they could use in case of problems.
Holding that transgender people in heterosexual relationships have the freedom and right to marry under existing legal provisions, the top court had said that the right to union, similar to marriage or civil union, or to confer legal status should be legally recognized to the relationship. It can only be done by "enacted law."
A five-judge constitutional bench headed by CJI Chandrachud had issued four separate verdicts on a batch of 21 petitions seeking legal sanction for same-sex marriages.
The five judges were unanimous in refusing to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act, noting that it was within the purview of Parliament to change the law to validate such a union.
While the CJI had written a separate 247-page verdict, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul (now retired) had written a 17-page judgment in which he broadly agreed with Justice Chandrachud's views.
Justice S. Ravindra Bhat (now retired), author of an 89-page judgment for himself and Justice Hima Kohli, disagreed with certain conclusions reached by the CJI, including the applicability of adoption rules for couples queer.
Justice PS Narasimha had said in his 13-page verdict that he completely agreed with the reasoning given and the conclusions arrived at by Justice Bhat.
The judges were unanimous in holding that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon and not an "urban or elite" phenomenon.
In his view, the CJI had recorded Attorney General Tushar Mehta's assurance that the Center will constitute a committee chaired by the cabinet secretary to define and elucidate the scope of rights of queer couples in union. .
LGBTQIA++ rights activists, who had won a major legal battle in 2018 in the Supreme Court that decriminalized consensual gay sex, had submitted to the high court the validation of same-sex marriage and consequent reliefs such as the rights to adoption and enrollment as parents in schools. , opening bank accounts and taking advantage of inheritance and insurance benefits.
Some of the petitioners had urged the apex court to use its full power, "prestige and moral authority" to pressure society to recognize such a union that would ensure LGBTQIA++ lead a "dignified" life like heterosexuals.
LGBTQIA++ means lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, pansexual, two-spirit, asexual and related people.
