On January 9, the Supreme Court of India dismissed review petitions challenging its October 2023 judgment, which declined to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriages. A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai, Surya Kant, BV Nagarathna, PS Narasimha, and Dipankar Datta reviewed the petitions in chambers without an open court hearing.
Petitioners' Arguments
The petitions argued that the original verdict was unjust and failed to provide relief to queer couples despite acknowledging the discrimination they face. However, the review bench emphasized that the October 2023 judgment contained no "error apparent on the record."
Majority View in October 2023 Judgment
The October 2023 decision, delivered by a 3-2 majority, concluded that granting legal recognition to same-sex marriages or civil unions was a matter for the legislature. The majority judgment, authored by Justices Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha, asserted that such recognition was not a constitutionally mandated right.
Dissenting Opinions
On the other hand, the dissenting opinions by CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice SK Kaul advocated for the constitutional rights of queer individuals to form unions and adopt children. They emphasized the need for enabling laws to protect LGBTQIA+ rights.
Common Ground Among Judges
Despite the split, all judges in the original bench agreed that queer couples have the right to cohabit without fear of violence, coercion, or interference. However, they refrained from extending this acknowledgment to formal legal recognition of such relationships.
Petitioners' Criticism
The petitioners criticized the Court for failing to prohibit discrimination against queer couples and for denying them meaningful protections.
Reinforcement of Legislative Role
The latest ruling reinforces the October 2023 judgment, maintaining that the issue of recognizing same-sex marriages lies within the legislative domain. While disappointing for LGBTQIA+ activists and allies, this decision underscores the judiciary's stance on respecting the separation of powers in matters of legislative policy.
