Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Same Gender Marriage Not Part Of Indian Culture: Centre Tells High Court
By: Tupaki Desk | 14 Sep 2020 12:30 PM GMT
The Central government on Monday opposed a petition in the Delhi High Court seeking to recognise same-sex marriages, saying that Indian culture does not recognise such a concept.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who represented the Centre, argued that the Act did not allow the concept of same-sex marriages. He said the marriage is only between man and wife, as per law.
He gave two reasons for not recognising or permitting registration of such marriages — firstly, the petition was asking the court to legislate and secondly, any relief granted would run opposite to various statutory provisions. He further said unless court does violence to various laws, this cannot be done.
A bench comprising Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan replied that the world over things were changing, but it may or may not apply to India.
However, the court questioned the need for a PIL in the instant case, saying the people who insist to be affected are well educated and can themselves approach the court. The court asked the petitioner to give details of the persons who were not permitted to register their same-sex marriage. The bench listed the matter for further hearing on 21 October.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who represented the Centre, argued that the Act did not allow the concept of same-sex marriages. He said the marriage is only between man and wife, as per law.
He gave two reasons for not recognising or permitting registration of such marriages — firstly, the petition was asking the court to legislate and secondly, any relief granted would run opposite to various statutory provisions. He further said unless court does violence to various laws, this cannot be done.
A bench comprising Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan replied that the world over things were changing, but it may or may not apply to India.
However, the court questioned the need for a PIL in the instant case, saying the people who insist to be affected are well educated and can themselves approach the court. The court asked the petitioner to give details of the persons who were not permitted to register their same-sex marriage. The bench listed the matter for further hearing on 21 October.
