Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriages. The apex court ruled that for LGBTQIA+ couples there is no unqualified right to marriage and that conferring legal status to civil union can only be through enacted law. The five-judge bench, however, noted that the judgment will not preclude the right of Queer persons to enter into relationships.
Soon after the verdict, the petitioners expressed their views and mentioned that the war is still underway and said that many observations were made in their favour.
One of the petitioners and LGBTQIA+ rights activist Harish Iyer said, "Though at the end, the verdict was not in our favour but so many observations(by Supreme Court) made were in our favour. They have also put the responsibility on the Central govt and the Central govt's Solicitor General said so many things against us so it is important for us to go to our elected govt, MPs and MLAs and tell them we are as different as two people. War is underway, it might take some time but we will get societal equality."
Another petitioner and activist Anjali Gopalan said, "We have been fighting for long and will keep doing so. Regarding adoption also nothing was done, what the CJI said was very good regarding adoption but it's disappointing that other justices didn't agree...this is democracy but we are denying basic rights to our own citizens."
Senior advocate Geeta Luthra who appeared for some of the petitioners in the marriage equality case said, "Even if the right to marriage has not been given, CJI has said that the same bundle of rights which every married couple has should be available to same-sex couples."
The bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha delivered the verdict it had reserved on May 11 this year.
The court, however, said the judgment will not preclude the right of Queer persons to enter into relationships. The apex court also said that the challenge to Special Marriage Act (SMA) on the ground of under-classification is not made out.
(With inputs from ANI)
