How Centre's Top Lawyer Responded To Verdict In Same-Sex Marriage Case

Welcoming the Supreme Court's judgment on marriage equality, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta said the verdict "balances the interests of individuals with the interests of a civilised society".

Mr Mehta, the second most senior government lawyer, had opposed the petitions seeking legal status for same-sex marriages on behalf of the centre.

The Supreme Court today stopped short of legalising same-sex marriages, but stressed that an individual's right to enter into a union cannot be restricted on the basis of sexual orientation. Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud pointed out that a failure to recognise queer relationships will lead to discrimination, but added that the court must be careful not to enter the legislative domain.

The five-judge bench gave four judgments, with different positions on whether same-sex couples should get the right to adopt children. While Chief Justice Chandrachud and Justice SK Kaul agreed that they should, Justice S Ravindra Bhat, Justice Hima Kohli and Justice PS Narasimha were against this.

"I wholeheartedly welcome the judgment. I am happy that my stand is accepted. All four judgments and the intellectual exercise which went into writing the judgments have taken the jurisprudence of our nation to the next level," Mr Mehta told NDTV.

"There are very few courts in the world where one can expect this level of intellectual and scholarly judicial exercise. This judgment would be read across jurisdictions," he said, adding, "Today's judgment balances the interests of individuals with the interests of a civilised society."

The Solicitor General said the Supreme Court's verdict is an important step in jurisprudential development on the question of separation of powers. "It provides vivid and eloquent insights into the working of the Parliament, the Executive and the Judiciary, which compliment each other strictly as per the Constitution," he said.

During the hearing on the issue, the centre had submitted that it would set up a committee headed by the cabinet secretary to look into practical difficulties faced by same-sex couples, such as getting Provident Fund, pension benefits. The court today noted the centre's submission and asked it to proceed with the formation of this panel.

The court, however, countered several arguments of the centre.

The centre had opposed the petitions for marriage equality, saying the petitioners are the "urban elite" and do not represent the majority of the Indian population. The court today disagreed, with the Chief Justice saying, "Queerness is not urban elite. Homosexuality or queerness is not an urban concept or restricted to the upper classes of the society."