Friday, Sep 25, 2020 | Last Update : 04:11 AM IST

185th Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra128396397321434345 Andhra Pradesh6543855794745558 Tamil Nadu5636915082109076 Karnataka5485574446588331 Uttar Pradesh3742773076115366 Delhi2606232243755123 West Bengal2378692080424606 Odisha196888161044805 Telangana1792461481391070 Bihar174266159700878 Assam165582135141608 Kerala15445898720614 Gujarat1289491093113382 Rajasthan1227201023301352 Haryana118554984101177 Madhya Pradesh115361814752007 Punjab105220814752860 Chhatisgarh9562358833680 Jharkhand7643862945626 Jammu and Kashmir68614480791024 Uttarakhand4440432154501 Goa3055224347360 Puducherry2489519311467 Tripura2378616955245 Himachal Pradesh133869232125 Chandigarh109688342123 Manipur9537736959 Arunachal Pradesh8416607113 Nagaland5730459810 Meghalaya4733252838 Sikkim2447190529 Mizoram158510120
  India   All India  14 Sep 2020  Centre tells Delhi High Court that same sex marriages not recognised by our values

Centre tells Delhi High Court that same sex marriages not recognised by our values

PTI
Published : Sep 14, 2020, 3:23 pm IST
Updated : Sep 14, 2020, 3:23 pm IST

With the direction to place these factual aspects before the court, the bench listed the matter for further hearing on October 21

Representational image
 Representational image

New Delhi: The Centre on Monday told the Delhi High Court that marriage between same sex couples was "not permissible" as it is not recognised by "our laws, legal system, society and our values".

The submission was made before a bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan by Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta during hearing of a PIL seeking a declaration that same sex marriages be recognised under the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) and Special Marriage Act.

 

Mehta opposed the relief sought in the petition saying "our laws, our legal system, our society and our values do not recognise a marriage, which is a sacrament, between same sex couples".

He said the plea to grant recognition to or permit registration of such marriages was "not permissible" for two reasons -- firstly, the petition was asking the court to legislate and secondly, any relief granted "would run contrary to various statutory provisions".

"Unless court does violence to various laws, this cannot be done," he added.

Mehta also said that under the HMA, the various provisions regulating marriages or prohibited relationships talk of husband and wife and therefore, who would be assigned these roles where a same sex couple was concerned.

 

The bench observed that the world over things were changing, but it may or may not be applicable to India.

It, however, questioned the need for a PIL in the instant case, saying the people who claim to be affected are well educated and can themselves approach the court.

"Why should we entertain the PIL," it added.

The counsel for the petitioner stated that the affected people were not coming forward themselves as they feared reprisals and therefore, a PIL was preferred.

It asked the lawyer appearing for the petitioner, Abhijit Iyer Mitra, to give details of the persons who were not permitted to register their same sex marriage.

 

With the direction to place these factual aspects before the court, the bench listed the matter for further hearing on October 21.

The petition has contended that despite the Supreme Court decriminalizing consensual homosexual acts, marriages between same sex couples was still not possible.

Tags: delhi high court, same sex marriage
Location: India, Delhi, New Delhi