Senior advocates Neeraj Kishan Kaul and Abhishek Manu Singhvi urged Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud to hold an open court hearing for the review petitions challenging the Supreme Court's October 17 judgment on same-sex marriage. They argued that the issue's societal importance warranted transparency and thorough deliberation.
Acknowledging the request, CJI Chandrachud noted the petition but emphasized that decisions on such matters involve procedural complexities. He clarified that a constitution bench would decide whether to permit an open court hearing, highlighting the need for collective judicial consideration.
The review petitions will be heard by a bench led by CJI Chandrachud, alongside justices Sanjiv Khanna, Hima Kohli, BV Nagarathna, and PS Narasimha. This bench was formed following the retirement of previous members. The hearing is scheduled for July 10, marking a significant judicial review amidst public interest.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court rules no bail conditions permitting police surveillance to protect privacy
The October ruling, passed by a 3-2 majority, declined legal recognition to same-sex marriages, citing legislative prerogatives over judicial mandates. It sparked widespread debate on constitutional rights and discrimination faced by LGBTQIA+ individuals in India.
Petitioners' arguments
Udit Sood, among the 52 petitioners, argued that the judgment's refusal to protect LGBTQIA+ rights contradicted its acknowledgment of discrimination. He highlighted the court's duty to rectify injustices, calling the decision an oversight.
While CJI Chandrachud and justice Kaul advocated for recognizing civil unions and adoption rights, others disagreed, underscoring legislative authority in defining marriage norms. This division underscores the complexity of balancing constitutional rights and statutory mandates.
ALSO READ: Modi and Starmer commit to accelerate Free Trade Agreement negotiations
The outcome of the July 10 review could influence LGBTQIA+ rights advocacy and legal frameworks in India, potentially setting precedents on judicial activism and legislative oversight in defining marriage equality.
As India awaits the Supreme Court's deliberations, the case signifies a pivotal moment in the country's legal stance on LGBTQIA+ rights, highlighting the judiciary's role in shaping societal norms and legal equality.
Copyright © © 2022 Copyright. All Rights Reserved with Arth Parkash