Plea to Review Same-Sex Marriage Verdict Mentioned in SC for Open Court Hearing

GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 23rd Nov. A petition was mentioned before the Supreme Court on Thursday, seeking a review of the October 17 verdict that denied legal recognition to same-sex marriages by queer couples. The petitioners argued that the review plea should be heard in open court to address the concerns of those seeking validation of same-sex marriages.

The Chief Justice, along with Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, acknowledged the submission and agreed to circulate the petition among the judges of the constitution bench.

The senior advocate representing the petitioners, Mukul Rohatgi, stated that all judges of the constitution bench agreed that discrimination exists and that a remedy should be provided. He emphasized the importance of an open court hearing, and the review plea is scheduled for consideration on November 28.

Under normal procedures, review pleas are considered by the judges concerned in chambers without oral submissions by lawyers. However, in exceptional cases, such as those involving penalties, review pleas are heard in open court.

The review plea, filed by Udit Sood, one of the 21 petitioners, in the first week of November, challenges the judgment. It argues that while the judgment acknowledged discrimination against queer couples, it failed to provide a solution and merely wished them well for the future.

The constitution bench, headed by the Chief Justice, delivered four separate verdicts on the batch of 21 petitions seeking legal recognition for gay marriages. The unanimous decision was to not provide legal backing for same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act, stating that it is within the jurisdiction of Parliament to change the law. However, by a majority of 3:2, the court held that queer couples do not have the right to adoption.

In his verdict, the Chief Justice issued several directions to the Centre, states, and Union territories to prevent discrimination against the queer community based on gender identity or sexual orientation. He also emphasized the need to raise public awareness about queer identity, stating that it is natural and not a mental disorder.

Justice S Ravindra Bhat, who co-authored a judgment with Justice Hima Kohli, disagreed with certain conclusions made by the Chief Justice, particularly regarding adoption rules for queer couples and the recognition of the right to civil union.

The review plea argues that the majority judgment undermines the court’s jurisdiction and fails to address the discrimination faced by the petitioners. It claims that there are errors apparent on the face of the record and an abdication of the court’s duty as entrusted by the Constitution.

The LGBTQIA++ individuals, who achieved a significant legal victory in 2018 when the Supreme Court decriminalized consensual same-sex relationships, have now approached the court seeking validation of same-sex marriage and related rights, such as adoption, parental rights, and access to benefits.

LGBTQIA++ stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, pansexual, two-spirit, asexual, and ally persons.