The constitutional bench of the Supreme Court started hearing the petitions filed in the case of Same Sex Marriage from Tuesday.
As soon as the hearing of the case started, the atmosphere looked heated. The central government raised questions on the admissibility of hearing these petitions.
Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta said that their objections on admissibility should be heard before the hearing on the petitions begins. This matter comes completely under the jurisdiction of the legislature.
An objection has also been raised on behalf of the government that the courts can interfere in this matter or it is only the monopoly of the Parliament.
However, Chief Justice (CJI) DY Chandrachud said that he would like to hear the petitioners first to understand the matter and would like to hear the government only after hearing the petitioner for some time.
However, still SG objected to this. He said that his only argument is that which constitutional forum can hear this issue and he also wants to tell his preliminary objections, not on the merit of this case.
Then the CJI said that let’s hear the petitioner first. On this, the SG said that first the petitioner should respond to the preliminary objections of the government. After this the CJI clearly said, ‘He is in charge of this court, so he will take this decision. The petitioner will be heard first. He will not allow anyone to tell how the process of hearing will go on in this court.
SG Mehta said that if it is so, then the government will also see whether it will participate in the hearing of this case or not.
On this, fellow Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul said that are you saying that the government will not attend the hearing. This is a very important issue and it is not good that the government should say that they will see whether they will attend the hearing or not.
After this the hearing started somewhere. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi started the arguments on behalf of the petitioners.
He said that the petitioner also has rights like ordinary people.
At one time same sex relations were a crime under section 377 of the law, now it is not so. But it cannot be said that 377 has been removed from IPC, now you live your life separately. If we are equal to the rest of the people, then the rights should also be equal. We just want that if in gay relationship People can live together, then their marriage should also be recognized, he said.
SG Mehta also said that there are many laws, which will have no meaning. Such matters should be done through Parliament only. In parliamentary committees, usually every aspect of any matter is seriously discussed and there are MPs of all parties in it.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, on behalf of Jameel Ulema-e-Hind, also opposed the same sex marriage. He said that he believes in the freedom of every person. They feel that people have the right to have relationships however they want. Suppose same-sex marriage is legalized and the couple has an adopted child, what will happen? In case of separation, who will be his father and who will be his mother? Who will pay alimony? The hearing of the case will continue on Wednesday as well.
