Same-sex marriage: Queerness neither urban nor elite concept or characteristic, agrees SC bench

The court refused to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriages.  The CJI said the court can't make law but only interpret it and it is for Parliament to change the Special Marriage Act.  "Non-heterosexual and heterosexual unions must be seen as both sides of the same coin," the CJI said, adding that legal recognition of non-heterosexual unions is a step towards marriage equality.

Justice Bhat, who read out the operative portion of his verdict, said he agrees and differs with the views of the CJI on certain points.

On May 11, the bench reserved its verdict on the pleas after a marathon hearing of 10 days. During the arguments, the Centre had told the apex court that any constitutional declaration made by it on the petitions seeking legal validation for same-sex marriage may not be a "correct course of action" as the court will not be able to foresee, envisage, comprehend and deal with its fallout.

The apex court had commenced hearing arguments in the matter on April 18.

Some of the petitioners had urged the apex court to use its plenary power, "prestige and moral authority" to push the society to acknowledge such a union which would ensure LGBTQIA++ lead a "dignified" life like heterosexuals.

LGBTQIA++ stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, pansexual, two-spirit, asexual and ally persons.