- Hindi News
- National
- same-sex marriage; Former IAS IPS officer’s letter to President Draupadi Murmu
New Delhi19 minutes ago
- copy link
This picture of Nagpur is from 2022. Pride parade was taken out in the city, then hundreds of people from the LGBTQ community took part in it.
Hearing is going on in the Supreme Court on the petition giving legal recognition to Same Sex Marriage. Meanwhile, around 120 former officers have written a letter to President Draupadi Murmu seeking his intervention in the matter. He said that if a law is made on same sex marriage in India, then the whole country may have to pay the price. Retired judges, former IAS and IPS are among those who wrote this letter.
Former officials said that we cannot give future generations an environment in which more gay people are ready. In our country, marriage is a social bond, with which many types of relationships are associated.
Former officer said – Many people are demanding this law in order to appear liberal
In the letter written to the President, it has been said that many people in the country are fighting to give legal recognition to same sex marriage. Such people have already divorced Indian values for the sake of appearing liberal. Many people will not know about their parents and ancestors if the law on same sex marriage is made in the country.
Now read the story of the same sex marriage case in the Supreme Court step by step…
April 27: Solicitor General asked who would be the wife in same-sex marriage?
The hearing on 20 petitions for recognition of same sex marriage took place in the Supreme Court on the sixth day on Thursday. The court has asked the central government to tell that if the marriage of same-sex couples is not given legal recognition, then what benefits will they get from it. The next hearing of the case will be on May 3. The hearing is being conducted by a constitutional bench of CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice SK Kaul, Justice Ravindra Bhat, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Hima Kohli.
Earlier, appearing for the Centre, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta asked who would be the wife in a same-sex marriage, who gets the right of maintenance. Who will be called wife in gay or lesbian marriage. On this, CJI Chandrachud said that if this reference is being made to apply in same sex marriage, then it means that the husband can also claim maintenance, but it will not be applicable in opposite gender marriages.
- The government is being forced to resolve the issue because if the judiciary enters into it, it will become a legal issue.
- The government should explain what it intends to do in this regard and how it is working for the safety and welfare of such people.
- The CJI also said that homosexuals cannot be excommunicated from the society.
- Justice Narasimha said- When we say recognition, it may not always be recognition as marriage. Recognition means, which entitles them to certain benefits.
- Justice Bhat said – Recognition should be such that it will benefit them.
SG Tushar Mehta’s arguments…
- Special Marriage Act is only for people of opposite gender. It was brought for those of different faiths. The government is not bound to recognize every private relationship. The petitioners want a new class to be created with a new purpose. This was never imagined.
- The government has to be slow in recognizing any relationship, because in this case it is on the platform of social and private relationship. If seen, marriages are not regulated in opposite genders, but the society feels that you cannot allow people to marry at any age and multiple times. There are many such things.
- Can ask for benefits given to homosexuals of the opposite gender. It is also possible that opposite gender married people will come to the court and say that I should get the same benefits that same-sex couples get, because I may be heterosexual inside, but I feel something else….
- Imagine what will happen after five years. Citing sexual autonomy, one can challenge in court only the provisions prohibiting incest. On this the CJI said that this is not logical. No court would ever support this.
- Those demanding recognition of gay marriage want the Special Marriage Act to be rewritten. The petitioners are looking after their need. Can any act be such that on one hand it applies to the opposite gender and on the other hand to homosexuals. It can’t make any sense.
Today’s updates related to the case other than the hearing
- Rijiju said – Supreme Court is not a platform to take decisions on behalf of the public: At an event on Wednesday, Law Minister Kiren Rijiju said that the issue of same-sex marriage recognition should be left to Parliament. Courts are not the right platform to deal with such cases. The Supreme Court can only remove the loopholes, but cannot take decisions that affect every citizen of the country. Because if people do not want then things cannot be imposed.
- 30 LGBTQI groups protest against the Bar Council: Meanwhile, over 600 students from law schools across India and over 30 LGBTQIA+ groups condemned the Bar Council of India’s statements amid the hearing on same-sex marriage recognition. All these BCI statements have been described as bizarre. The Bar Council had said that 99% people are against the recognition of same sex marriage. That’s why the Supreme Court should leave the task of making laws to the Parliament.
News related to the last 5 hearings in this case…
Fifth day hearing – Center’s reply cannot be forced to write a new definition of marriage
The fifth day of hearing has been completed in the Supreme Court on 20 petitions seeking recognition of same sex marriage. During this, a petitioner said that by not recognizing same sex marriage, you are depriving the children of LGBTQ couples from parenthood. Read full news…
Hearing on the fourth day- The petitioner said – it is recognized in 12 G-20 countries, we cannot lag behind
During the hearing on the fourth day, the petitioners said that 34 countries of the world have recognized same sex marriage. These also include 12 countries of the G-20. We should not lag behind in this matter. The petitioner said that the Parliament has not given any positive response in 5 years regarding the rights of LGBT. Read the full news…
Hearing on the third day- CJI asked- Is it necessary to have 2 different gender partners for marriage?
For the third consecutive day, the hearing lasted for about 4 hours. Amidst the arguments given by the petitioners, the Supreme Court asked whether it is necessary for an institution like marriage to have partners of two different genders? While concluding the hearing, CJI Chandrachud named 13 lawyers to argue further. Read full news…
Hearing of the second day – the petitioner said – the status of marriage gives financial support and security
During the second day of hearing on Wednesday on 20 petitions seeking legal recognition of same sex marriage, the CJI said that the government does not have the data to prove that same sex marriage is an elite class concept. Read full news…
First day’s hearing – The government said – there should be no hearing on the matter; CJI said – exercise for the next generations
Opposing the recognition of same sex, the central government said that we are getting entangled in this matter. We are saying that the matter should not be heard at all. This is a very sensitive issue. On this, the court said that the exercise of hearing is being done for generations to come. The court and Parliament will decide on this later. Read full news…