LGBTQ members take part in a pride parade in Nagpur.
Credit: PTI File Photo
New Delhi: A Constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed the pleas seeking review of its October 17, 2023 judgment declining legal sanction to same-sex marriage.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai, Surya Kant, B V Nagarathna, P S Narasimha and Justice Dipankar Datta said they did not find any error apparent on the face of the record in its previous decision.
In its order delivered following in chamber proceedings, the bench said, "We have carefully gone through the judgments delivered by S Ravindra Bhat (former judge) speaking for himself and for Justice Hima Kohli (former Judge) as well as the concurring opinion expressed by one of us ( Justice Narasimha), constituting majority view."
The court further said that the view expressed in both the judgments is in accordance with law and as such, no interference was warranted.
"Accordingly, the review petitions are dismissed," the bench said.
The court also rejected an application for listing the review petitions in open court.
A batch of petitions related to the matter were considered in judges chambers.
According to Supreme Court Rules, the review pleas are considered in chambers by judges by circulation of documents and without presence of counsel.
The top court had earlier refused to allow an open-court hearing on the review pleas. The new bench was constituted after Justice Sanjiv Khanna, the present CJI, recused from hearing the review petitions on July 10, 2024.
Notably, Justice P S Narasimha is the only member of the original Constitution bench comprising five judges which delivered the verdict, as former CJI D Y Chandrachud and Justices S K Kaul, Ravindra Bhat, and Hima Kohli have retired.
A five-judge Constitution bench led by then CJI Chandrachud on October 17, 2023, refused to accord legal backing to same-sex marriages and held there was "no unqualified right" to marriage with the exception of those recognised by law.
The apex court, however, made a strong pitch for the rights of LGBTQIA++ persons so they didn't face discrimination in accessing goods and services available to others; safe houses known as "garima greh" in all districts for shelter to members of the community facing harassment and violence, and dedicated hotlines in case of trouble.
In its judgement, the bench held transpersons in heterosexual relationships had the freedom and entitlement to marry under the existing statutory provisions.
It said an entitlement to legal recognition of the right to union, akin to marriage or civil union, or conferring legal status to the relationship could be only done through an "enacted law". The five-judge Constitution bench delivered four separate verdicts on a batch of 21 petitions seeking legal sanction for same-sex marriages.
All five judges were unanimous in refusing the legal recognition to same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act and observed it was within Parliament's ambit to change the law for validating such a union.