The Supreme Court Constitution Bench, hearing arguments for the recognition of same-sex marriage for the fifth day on Wednesday, pointed out that Parliament was empowered to legislate on the subject of marriage and divorce, and asked as to how far the top court could interfere in such matters. The bench also observed that legalising same-sex marriage without touching personal laws was not an easy task and wondered how to come up with a solution
During the hearing today, Petitioner urges usage of words like 'third gender spouse' for trans marriages
Katju: The question which fell from this court was on Section 21A of the special marriage act. I will also address on what the consequences will follow if this court decides in favour of the petitioners. This court cannot decide all questions today.
These are complex statutes and LBGTQ will come to SC, family courts, civil courts with questions of statutory interpretation same as heterosexual couples do. We seek a right to not be treated as different.
Katju: Positive declaration of marriage under SMA. Both positive declaration as a mandamus and a negative declaration as prohibition will go a long wa. It's not a light question to decide. As far article 21a is considered, it will apply to same sex couple and other trans people.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy