The Battle for Marriage Equality: Supriya Chakraborty & Anr. v Union of India, 2023 INSC 920 

 The Supreme Court of India's ruling in Supriya Chakraborty & Anr. v Union of India (2023 INSC 920) represents a significant legal discourse in the context of LGBTQIA+ rights in India, particularly focusing on the right to marriage.

Case Background

Initiated by two same-sex couples, this case challenged the constitutionality of marriage laws like the Special Marriage Act, 1954, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and Foreign Marriage Act, 1969, arguing that the non-recognition of same-sex marriages violated fundamental rights​​​​.

Court's Rationale on the Special Marriage Act

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the right to marry is not a fundamental right for queer persons. The Court upheld the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954, emphasizing that it was not enacted to recognize non-heteronormative marriages. Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud explained that declaring Section 4 of the SMA unconstitutional would diminish its purpose as a progressive legislation aimed at bolstering interfaith and inter-caste relationships. He argued that invalidating the Act would regress India to a pre-independence era where inter-caste and inter-faith marriages were impermissible, resulting in one form of discrimination being eradicated at the cost of another​​. Furthermore, the Court rejected the petitioners' proposal for a purposive interpretation of the SMA to include non-heterosexual couples. CJI Chandrachud stated that altering the Act’s language would equate to redrafting the law, overstepping judicial boundaries and violating the separation of powers doctrine​​.

Judicial Process

The case was heard by a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, consisting of Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, and Justices S.K. Kaul, S.R Bhat, Hima Kohli, and P.S. Narasimha. The bench upheld the validity of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, and held that the right to marry is not a fundamental right for queer persons. This decision was reached after various hearings, including the transfer of similar petitions from the Delhi and Kerala High Courts to the Supreme Court​​.

Impact and Conclusion

The ruling underscores the complexities involved in balancing progressive legislation with evolving social norms. While the Court's decision was a setback for the LGBTQIA+ rights movement, it also highlighted the ongoing legal and social challenges in recognizing diverse forms of relationships within the existing legal framework.

References

Supriyo v. Union of India - Wikipedia. Retrieved from Wikipedia

Plea for Marriage Equality - Supreme Court Observer. Retrieved from Supreme Court Observer

Detailed information about the case and the arguments presented. Retrieved from Wikipedia