Same-sex marriage hearing highlights: Bench concludes hearing, to re-assemble tomorrow

The Supreme Court on Tuesday commenced it’s hearing on a bunch of petitions demanding legal recognition for same-sex marriages in India, clarifying that the remit of the proceedings will confine to validation of such marriages under the Special Marriage Act (SMA). Read more

The first day of the hearing in same-sex marriage case comes to an end. Constitution bench to re-assemble tomorrow. Bench rises for the day.

“When you deny me the right of marriage, you deny me citizenship. If you deny me citizenship, you are saying you're no good, you're not equal to a citizen under preamble so you stay where you are.”

“I am not perceived as a criminal but I am still perceived as a person who is not as good, unworthy of standing shoulder to shoulder in public arena.”

“This argument cannot be raised to leave it to Parliament, because your lordships are the protector of fundamental rights…In Navtej judgment, it was said that full media publicity should be given to the verdict but nothing happened. This is a disdain of the direction of this court.”

“In the Indian society, every parent wants their child to be settled. One of the aspects of settlement is not only to choose your education and vocation but also marriage, family…So we must have it too. I request this court to grant it to us.”

“LGBTQ+ community possess the same human right as a heterosexual person and thus they have a right to marry and cannot be said to be left alone.. thus we request this court to grant us this relief same sex marriage.”

“On one hand LGBTQ community is entitled to say that they can make their own choices and live as they want and then society cannot say that you continue to live but we will not recognize you and deprive you benefit of conventional social institutions so it is not proper to leave them alone to be recognized by social institutions.” 

Advocate Rohatgi agrees and says, “It's not good enough to say that we'll leave you alone with 377, now be happy.”

“I don't want merely an amendment to the act without the declaration. Because if your lordships only interpret the act, tomorrow it can be amended and then we're sunk. Thus, I request a constitutional declaration of marriage akin to heterogeneous group,” Rohatgi argues for petitioners.

“What you speak here and what you speak at home will be different. that is how privacy works,” says Justice Bhat. To this, adv Rohatgi says, “Iam not reinventing the wheel.. I am only putting together the rights granted to me since marriage was not in question in earlier hearings on same sex marriage.”

“Procreation, in today's scenario, can also include adoption, IVF, surrogacy- it need not only be procreation in one form.”

"Choice of an individual is not an "elitist concept". It is innate. People are born with it. So was Nero born, thousands of years ago." Justice Bhat said, “Let's not model ourselves on Nero.” 

“I cannot be told that I should wait for parliament to grant me these rights when I'm dead and gone.”

“The other side is talking as if this is 1920s or 30s and they're saying you're not equal, be happy with the 377 judgements, be happy with the rights you already have.”

“The other side is talking as if this is 1920s or 30s and they're saying you're not equal, be happy with the 377 judgements, be happy with the rights you already have." Rohatgi further refers to judgements.

“My rights are equal to those of the others. They have a right to marriage, the right of respectability. A concomitant of rights flow from that respectability. The same should be granted to me”.

“Discrimination against an individual on the basis of sexial orientation is deeply offensive to the dignity and self worth of the individua,” says Rohatgi

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi akes the bench through multiple judgements highlighting the rights of LGBTQIA++ individuals. His core argument is on the stigma faced by ‘queers’. "The test of popular acceptance does not furnish a valid basis to disregard rights which are conferred with the sanctity of constitutional protection," he said.

“This is the core of my arguments. Because we're miniscule, because we have faced this over the years, because we have been sidetracked, because we're looked at with disdain, because we're looked as QUEERS, you're not good.”

‘If you don’t have full enjoyment of life, then you won't have dignity': Rohatgi

"Recognition of one's gender identity lies at the heart of the fundamental right to dignity," he said.

"The expression sex is not limited to biological sex of male or female but intended to include people who consider themselves neither," adv Rohatgi argues.

"Both gender and biological attributes contribute distinct components of sex..." he said.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi said secularism was held to be a part of the basic structure in SR Bommai case..Para 1 of TMA Pai... 11 judge bench was headed by the then CJI BN Kirpal and he noted India is the land of diversity.... all of this means that people who constitute the unity of nation must move together.

Adv Rohatgi now reads out NALSA judgment on inclusion of transgender community.

“It pains me to see the Govt calling it an elitist concept...State isn't willing to recognize anything apart from heterogeneous relationships,” he said.