Same-Sex Marriage Case: Review Petition Filed Against Supreme Court Verdict

A review petition has been filed in response to the Supreme Court's rejection of legal recognition for same-sex marriages. The review plea was submitted to the highest court by one of the original petitioners in the same-sex marriage case, Udit Sood, a patent attorney employed at a U.S.-based law firm. In the wake of the initial judgment, Sood expressed profound disappointment while acknowledging the resilience of the queer community, stating, "If anything, we are resilient, and we know how to take a beating, strategize, and move forward." He emphasized that the community would come together to share their concerns and chart a way forward.

The reviewed plea highlights several critical issues. It contends that the majority judgment is inherently flawed as it recognizes discrimination against the petitioners' fundamental rights but fails to prohibit such discrimination. Furthermore, it deems the judgment as self-contradictory and manifestly unjust, asserting that it effectively forces young queer Indians to conceal their true selves and lead dishonest lives if they desire the joys of a genuine family.

The review petition sets forth three primary grounds for reconsideration of the judgment. It underscores the importance of the Supreme Court reevaluating its decision, as it currently subjects the constitutional rights of queer individuals to the whims of social morality and politics. Additionally, it asserts that the judgment overlooks the fact that marriage represents an enforceable social contract, and consenting adults should have the right to enter into such contracts without hindrance. The plea firmly states that no contract or coercive state action, such as imprisonment, should curtail an adult's fundamental right to marry.

The petition further maintains that while the judgment acknowledges discrimination against queer people, it fails to provide a means to address this discrimination. It asserts that the court holds an obligation to rectify constitutional discriminations.

On October 17, the Supreme Court declined to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriages, contending that it is the prerogative of Parliament to enact laws enabling such recognition. A constitution bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, alongside Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha, issued the verdict. This ruling arrived five years after a landmark 2018 judgment in which the Supreme Court abolished a colonial-era ban on gay sex.

The court stated that the law presently does not acknowledge the right to marry or the right of same-sex couples to enter civil unions until Parliament establishes appropriate legislation. Nevertheless, it affirmed equal rights for queer individuals and their protection while advocating for public sensitization to prevent discrimination against them.

The judgment exhibited a 3:2 split on various aspects, including adoption, with Justices Kohli, Bhat, and Narasimha on one side and Justices Chandrachud and Kaul on the other.