Supreme Court Verdict on Same-Sex Marriage Rights in India: Equality Deferred, Dialogue Continues
- ByAdmin --
- 17 Jun 2025 --
- 0 Comments
the Supreme Court of India, in a highly anticipated verdict, declined to legalize same-sex marriages, stating that such recognition falls within the domain of the legislature and not the judiciary. The decision, delivered by a five-judge Constitution Bench, has been both applauded for protecting certain LGBTQIA+ rights and criticized for not going far enough in ensuring full equality.
Background
Petitioners comprising LGBTQIA+ couples, activists, and legal scholars argued that denial of the right to marry violated their fundamental rights under the Constitution of India, specifically:
- Article 14 – Right to Equality
- Article 15 – Prohibition of discrimination
- Article 19 – Freedom of expression
- Article 21 – Right to life and personal liberty, including dignity and autonomy
They requested an inclusive interpretation of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, allowing same-sex couples to register their marriages under this secular law.
Key Takeaways from the Verdict
- The Bench delivered a split 3:2 judgment.
- Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul recognized the rights of queer individuals to form unions and proposed a framework for civil partnerships.
- The majority, led by Justice Ravindra Bhat (with Justices Hima Kohli and P.S. Narasimha concurring), held that:
“There is no unqualified fundamental right to marry.” - The court declined to interpret or amend the Special Marriage Act, 1954 to include same-sex couples, stating that doing so would be legislative overreach.
Legal Highlights and Issues Addressed
- Right to Form Unions: The court affirmed the right of queer individuals to form partnerships and live with dignity.
- Marriage as a Statutory Right: It was clarified that marriage, unlike life or liberty, is not a fundamental right under the Constitution.
- Legislative Domain: The court directed that any change in marriage laws must come through Parliament, not judicial pronouncement.
- Adoption Rights: The court declined to grant same-sex couples the right to adopt jointly under the Juvenile Justice Act.
Constitutional and Legal References
- Article 14 & 15 – Equality and non-discrimination: Recognized as applicable to queer individuals, though not extended to redefine marriage.
- Article 21 – Right to life and dignity: Used to reaffirm that queer individuals are entitled to choose their partners and cohabit.
- Special Marriage Act, 1954 – Petitioners sought reinterpretation of terms like "husband" and "wife" to be gender-neutral. The majority found such an amendment to be beyond judicial capacity.
Dissenting Views
- CJI Chandrachud, in a separate opinion, advocated for a legal framework to recognize civil unions and extend certain partnership benefits to queer couples.
- He also proposed allowing same-sex couples the right to joint adoption, which the majority did not agree with.
- Justice Kaul echoed these views and urged the government to take proactive steps to ensure legal protection for non-heteronormative relationships.
What the Verdict Means
- The court did not grant marriage equality, but recognized the right to love and cohabit.
- It urged the government to prevent discrimination against queer couples in areas such as housing, healthcare, employment, and access to public services.
- It stopped short of creating any new legal status, like civil unions, and left such developments to future legislative action.
The Way Forward
- Parliament now holds the responsibility to consider whether and how to recognize same-sex unions under Indian law.
- The ruling may serve as a stepping stone for future legislation on civil partnerships or cohabitation rights.
- Legal experts and activists see this as both a partial victory and a missed opportunity, but believe it sets a foundation for broader reform.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court's verdict reflects a carefully balanced approach, choosing judicial restraint while affirming the dignity and autonomy of LGBTQIA+ individuals. While it does not legalize same-sex marriage, the ruling reinforces the constitutional commitment to equality, privacy, and non-discrimination. The evolving conversation around queer rights in India now moves from the courtroom to the legislature and to broader society.
RELATED Blog
0 comments