The petitions asking for the extension of the right to marry to members of the LGBTQIA+ community, pending before various High Courts, were transferred to the Supreme Court's three-judge bench on December 7. The bench was led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala.

A Bench commanded, "Since several batches of petitions are pending before Delhi, Kerala and Gujarat High Courts involving the same question, we are of the view that they should be transferred and decided by this Court. We direct that all writ petitions shall stand transferred to this Court."

The Court further stated that any petitioner who is unable to hire counsel may appear virtually and present their arguments.

After all parties have submitted written arguments and counterarguments, the case will be heard on March 13. While Advocate Kanu Agrawal will serve as the nodal counsel for the Central government, Advocate Arundhati Katju has been designated as the nodal counsel for the petitioners. 

But the CJI noted, "We will transfer all petitions before the Supreme Court. Any petitioner who wants to appear virtually can appear virtually make any point, we will hear them."

Supriyo Chakraborty and Abhay Dang, two homosexual men residing in Hyderabad, filed one of the petitions the court was hearing, asking that LGBTQIA+ people also have the right to marry the person of their choice.

Abhay and Supriyo have been together for almost ten years. They both acquired COVID-19 during the second wave of the pandemic, and after they recovered, they decided to get married to mark their relationship's ninth anniversary.

They do not, however, have the same rights as a married couple, the plea argued.

In the Puttaswamy case, the Supreme Court was alleged to have ruled that LGBTQIA+ people have the same constitutional rights to equality, dignity, and privacy as other citizens.

Parth Phiroze Mehrotra and Uday Raj, a lesbian couple, claimed in a separate petition that the Constitution's Articles 14 and 21 (which protect the right to life) are violated when same-sex weddings are not recognised.