Same-sex marriage: Government of India tells Supreme Court that all states must be consulted

GoI has filed a fresh affidavit in the same-sex marriage case and urged the Apex Court to make all states a party in the matter

GoI has filed a fresh affidavit in the same-sex marriage case and urged the Apex Court to make all states a party in the matter
GoI has filed a fresh affidavit in the same-sex marriage case and urged the Apex Court to make all states a party in the matter

GoI asks the opinion of all states; urges involvement

Continuing its opposition, the Government of India on Wednesday urged the Supreme Court that all states be made parties to the proceedings on the pleas seeking legal validation for same-sex marriages, saying any decision on the issue without obtaining their view would render the present “adversarial exercise incomplete and truncated”. In a fresh affidavit filed in the apex court, the Centre said it had issued a letter on April 18 to all the states inviting comments and views on the “seminal issue” raised in these petitions.

It said the framers of the Constitution have specifically provided for a separate entry in the Concurrent List, which is a part of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution conferring a constitutional function of legislating with respect to the institution of “marriage”, the requisite conditions for a valid marriage, regulations of such institutions like making provisions for divorce, alimony, etc.

Referring to entry 5 of the Concurrent List in the Seventh Schedule, the affidavit said, “It is submitted that every component of entry 5 above is intrinsically interrelated and any change in any one will necessarily have an inevitable cascading effect on other.”

“The present matter and issue delineated by this court, even when limited to the Special Marriage Act, 1954, entails the purported judicial creation of a social institution called ‘marriage’ of a different kind than contemplated under the existing law,” it said. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, requested a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud that states be made parties to the proceedings. The bench, comprising Justices S K Kaul, S R Bhat, Hima Kohli, and P S Narasimha, commenced hearing for the second day on the batch of pleas seeking legal validation for same-sex marriages.

In its affidavit, the Centre has said it is clear that the rights of the states, especially the right to legislate on the subject, will be affected by any decision on the issue. “It is submitted that further, various states have already legislated on the subject through delegated legislations, therefore making them a necessary and proper party to be heard in the present case,” it said.

The Central government said in such a matter, wherein legislative rights of the states under the Seventh Schedule and the rights of the residents of the states are clearly in question, it was the “bounden duty” of the petitioners to make all of them a party to this litigation. “It is submitted that despite the same, the states were not made a party to the present batch of petition unlike other occasions wherein for decisions on questions of seminal constitutional importance, especially wherein legislative powers of the states are under the scanner of the court, this court has issued notices to the states and taken their respective stands on record,” it said.

The affidavit further said, “It is submitted that any decision on the present issues without making states a party, without specifically obtaining their opinion on the present issue, would render the present adversarial exercise incomplete and truncated.”

PGurus is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with all the latest news and views

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.

We are a team of focused individuals with expertise in at least one of the following fields viz. Journalism, Technology, Economics, Politics, Sports & Business. We are factual, accurate and unbiased.
Team PGurus


  1. Marriage is not complete without natural sex and suppose it can be annulled if the the marriage is not consummated. Can there be natural sex between a same sex couple? Can the law decide if annal penetration is natural sex? Besides is this a urgent human rights issue? We will now be adding new issue of a consensual or otherwise sodomy. The argument of whether this is a concern of Urban Elite only, apart should the priority not be give relief to lacks of people rotting in the jails. Are we not being selective on human rights.

  2. Justice is not a voting system to involve states, it should be based on principles. Stupidity & idiocy reaching its zenith
    This CJI is hell bent on imitating west, without knowing Indian / Hindu values. He is disgrace to India / Hindus


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here