Delhi High Court to hear on October 25 batch of pleas seeking recognition of same sex marriage under various laws in India

Delhi High Court to hear on October 25 batch of pleas seeking recognition of same sex marriage under various laws in India
X

The Delhi High Court today adjourned till October 25 a batch of pleas seeking recognition of same sex marriage under various laws in India.

The Division bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh adjourned the matter after Solictor Genral of India Tushar Mehta sought adjournment saying that “the matter required no urgent hearing”.

The petitioners have contended in the petition that marriages between same sex couples are not possible despite the Supreme Court decriminalising consensual homosexual acts.

Last year, the High Court in one of the pleas had sought responses from the Centre and the Delhi government on the plea filed by two women and also asked the central government and the Consulate General of India in New York to respond to the petition by the two men.

The petitions have been filed by equal rights activists Abhijit Iyer Mitra, Vaibhav Jain,Dr Kavita Arora, Udit Sood, Joydeep Sengupta and others seeking recognition of same sex marriage under various laws in India.

The recent petition filed by Joydeep Sengupta and Blaine Stephens who are a same sex couple recognized as a legally married couple in the U.S., France, and Canada has sought a declaration that the right to legal recognition of a same sex marriage or queer marriage is a fundamental right under Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 irrespective of a person’s gender, sex or sexual orientation.

In the previous hearing the Centre through SGI Mehta opposing early hearing application in the batch of pleas had said “ Nobody is dying because they don’t have a marriage certificate, you don’t need marriage certificates for hospitals.”

The Central Government has argued that though same sex relationship has been decriminalized by the Supreme Court, same sex is still not acceptable in the Indian Society and cannot be included as a fundamental right

Case Title: Batch of Petitions

Next Story