On Tuesday, October 17, the 5-judge bench of the Supreme Court, presided by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, in a 3-2 verdict ruled that Queer couples cannot be granted the right to jointly adopt a child.
#LGBTQIA: Supreme Court in 3:2 Vedict Denies Adoption Rights For Queer Couples#cjidychandrachud, Justic SK Kaul favoured, but Justices Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha opposed adoption rights.#SupremeCourt pic.twitter.com/qp7sl03Xhd
— Mirror Now (@MirrorNow) October 17, 2023
Notably, the five-judge bench differed on the applicability of adoption rules for non-heterosexual couples. While Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Sanjay Kaul asserted that queer couples should be given adoption rights, Justices Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha disagreed.
Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, while reading out the verdict on same-sex marriage, said that the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) circular, which denies adoption rights to queer couples, is “violative of Article 15 of the Constitution”.
“CARA Regulation 5(3) indirectly discriminates against atypical unions. A queer person can adopt only in an individual capacity. This has the effect of reinforcing the discrimination against the queer community,” he said, adding, “There is no material on record to prove that only a married heterosexual couple can provide stability to a child.”
While the CJI supported the adoption rights and scrapping of CARA Regulation 5(3), three judges dissented from the proposal effectively nullifying the possibility of adoption for non-heterosexual couples.
Supreme Court refuses to legalise same-sex marriage
On Tuesday, October 17, the Supreme Court delivered its verdict on a clutch of petitions demanding the legalisation of same-sex marriage. The apex court bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha, have refused to recognise same-sex marriage as legal in India.
In a 3-2 verdict, the apex court opinioned that there was no constitutional or fundamental right to civil unions. It left it for the Parliament and State legislature to decide whether same-sex marriage should be given legal status and to formulate legislation on it.
The apex court also refused to strike down Special Marriage Act and Foreign Marriage Act for not recognizing queer marriages. It recorded the statement of the Union that it will constitute a Committee to examine the rights and benefits which can be given to queer couples.
