Centre opposes petitions looking for authorized recognition of same-sex marriages

The Centre on Thursday opposed a batch of petitions looking for recognition and registration of same-sex marriages within the nation and informed the Delhi High Court that dwelling collectively as companions and having sexual relationship by same-sex people will not be comparable with the “Indian family unit concept” of a husband, spouse and youngsters.
“By and large the institution of marriage has a sanctity attached to it and in major parts of the country, it is regarded as a sacrament. In our country, despite statutory recognition of the relationship of marriage between a biological man and a biological woman, marriage necessarily depends upon age-old customs, rituals, practices, cultural ethos and societal values,” the Centre informed the courtroom in response to the petitions looking for recognition and registration of same-sex marriages underneath the Hindu Marriage Act, the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act.
The Centre additionally mentioned regardless of that decriminalisation of Section 377 underneath Indian Penal Code by the Supreme Court, the petitioners can not declare a basic proper for same-sex marriage underneath the legal guidelines of the nation and that Article 21 is topic to the process established by legislation and “the same cannot be expanded to extend to include the fundamental right for a same sex marriage to be recognised under the laws of the country which in fact mandate the contrary.”

It additionally mentioned that such relationships might be ruled, regulated, permitted or proscribed solely by a legislation made by the competent legislature. “The acceptance of the institution of marriage between two individuals of the same gender is neither recognised nor accepted in any uncodified personal laws or any codified statutory laws. The question as to whether such a relationship be permitted to be formalised by way of a legal recognition of marriage is essentially a question to be decided by the legislature and can never be a subject matter of judicial adjudication,” the reply filed earlier than the courtroom by Centre reads.
The authorities additionally mentioned that the wedding in India isn’t just a matter between two people however “a solemn institution” between a organic man and a organic girl”.
“While a marriage may be between two private individuals having a profound impact on their private lives, it cannot be relegated to merely a concept within the domain of privacy of an individual. It is submitted that marriage, as a public concept, is also nationally and internationally recognised as a public recognition of a relationship with which several statutory rights and obligations are attached,” it has informed the courtroom.
Dr Kavita Arora, a psychiatrist and Ankita Khanna, a therapist, in one of many petitions have sought enforcement of the elemental proper of alternative of associate, after their software for solemnisation of marriage underneath the SMA was rejected by a Marriage Officer in Delhi’s Kalkaji on the bottom that they’re a same-sex couple. The second petition, filed by Parag Vijay Mehta –– an OCI card holder, and Vaibhav Jain, an Indian citizen –– who married in Washington DC in 2017 –– additionally seeks course for registration of marriage underneath the FMA after they had been denied the identical by the Consulate General of India at New York.
The authorities additionally has mentioned the query will not be whether or not the same-sex marriages might be fitted within the current authorized framework however “rather the question is that when the legislative intent, with regard to limiting the legal recognition of marriage and the benefits associated with such legal recognition, are limited to heterosexual couples, it is not permissible for the Hon’ble Court to override the same”.

The PIL looking for the popularity of same-sex marriages underneath the Hindu Marriage Act has been filed by Abhijit Iyer Mitra and three others. The Court final yr noticed that the statute is gender impartial and the Centre should interpret the legislation in favour of residents of India.