Recognition Of Same-Sex Marriages Would Be Against The ‘Social Fabric’: Central Government To Supreme Court

Anirudh Alex Victor

The Central Government has objected to applications submitted to the Supreme Court involving homosexual couples demanding legal recognition of same-sex marriage.

The Centre opposed the petitions demanding legal recognition of same-sex marriage within the nation in a counter-affidavit brought before the Supreme Court. In the opinion of the Centre, same-sex marriages can indeed not be equated to the Hindu family model of a male, and a female, and children are born from the marriage.

Marriage can occur between two private individuals, critical and significant of their private lives, yet it can’t be downgraded to purely and simply a conception inside the realm of confidentiality for a person whenever the issue of legitimizing their relationships and the legal implications resulting thereupon is involved, as stated in the Centre’s 56-page affidavit.

Registration of same-sex marriages further infringes existing personal and codified laws, such as “degrees of prohibited relationships”, “conditions of marriage,” and “symbolic and religious obligations” under personal laws governing people. 

According to the government, the nature of marriage as a legal contract fluctuates based on personal laws. It is a sacrament, a sacred union for the fulfillment of reciprocal obligations between a man and a woman, according to Hindus. It is a contract in Islam, though it’s only between such a biological man and a biological woman.

“It will, therefore, not be permissible to pray for a writ of this court to change the entire legislative policy of the country deeply embedded in religious and societal norms,” the government asserted.

Importantly, on January 6, the Supreme Court moved to itself all applications filed in High Courts throughout the nation demanding legal recognition for same-sex marriages. On March 13, the Supreme Court would begin hearings on petitions pursuing the legitimacy of same-sex marriage.

It’s indeed important to keep in mind that, whilst homosexuality has now become legal in India since the Supreme Court nullified Section 377 of the IPC in 2018, same-sex marriage is banned.

Earlier, a panel of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala brought to itself all petitions demanding the validity of same-sex marriage pending among multiple High Courts.

Nonetheless, referencing sections of the Domestic Violence Act, the Centre claimed that the above-mentioned as well as other statutory provisions are ill-suited to same-sex marriage.

It was additionally argued that the Supreme Court in the Puttaswamy case affirmed that LGBTQIA+ individuals were entitled to the identical right to equality, integrity, and dignity that were afforded to all other citizens under the Constitution.

Advocates Kanu Agrawal and GaurangBhushan prepared the Union of India’s affidavit. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta has addressed the matter.

Case name: Supriyo and v. Union of India