Same-Sex Marriage Judgement

What was the petitioner’s pleas?

non-recognition of same-sex marriage violates the rights to equality, freedom of expression and dignity. The petitioners argue that Section 4(c) of the Act recognizes marriage only between a ‘male’ and a ‘female’. This discriminates against same-sex couples by denying them matrimonial benefits such as adoption, surrogacy, employment and retirement benefits. T

What was the court’s judgement?

The five-judge Bench unanimously agreed that there is no fundamental right to marry, and marriages between queer persons cannot be read into the Special Marriage Act, 1954. All five judges agreed that transgender persons in heterosexual relationships have the right to marry under the existing legal framework.

On the right to form civil unions, the court split 3:2 with the majority holding that no such right exists. The bench split 3:2 on the rights of unmarried non-heterosexual couples to adopt as well, with the majority holding that the Union’s guidelines barring such adoption was legally valid

In which of the following cases, SC recognises the transgender as a third gender?

NALSA v Union of India

Right to form association or union is a fundamental freedom under which article of Indian Constitution?

Article 19 (1)(b)

Which state is the first state to grant reservation to transgender persons in all government services?

Karnataka

Who is the first transgender judge of India?

Joyita Mondal is India's first transgender judge

Which is the first country in Asia to legalise same sex marriage?

Taiwan