"We used to treat even this as far-fetched." Arguing for the Centre against same-sex marriages, Tushar Mehta asked some important questions in the Supreme Court.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00In case of a gay marriage, who will be the wife?
00:04In case of a lesbian's marriage, who will be the wife?
00:06In case of a transgender marriage, who will be the wife?
00:09These questions will arise.
00:11I can kindly visualize a situation after five years down the line, based on this very thing,
00:21that from the beginning, I am attracted to those persons who are mentioned in the degrees
00:28of prohibited relationship.
00:30Incest is not uncommon in the world, and world over, incest is prohibited.
00:36That I am attracted to my sister, we are consenting adults, we are entering into activities within
00:46the privacy, and we claim our right of autonomy, our right of choice, and our right of doing
00:54something in private domain.
00:58Based on that very argument, I am posing a question to myself, can someone not challenge
01:02this definition itself, why this restriction?
01:05Who are you to decide with whom?
01:07I have my sexual orientation, it may be a little far-fetched, we used to treat even
01:18this as far-fetched.
01:19But you know, Mr. Solicitor, sexual orientation or your autonomy as an individual can never
01:26be exercised.
01:28All aspects of marriage, including the entry into marriage, the prohibited relationships,
01:33the grounds on which marriage can be dissolved, these are all subject to regulation by law.
01:39Full blood, definition of full blood and half blood.
01:42Two persons are said to be related to each other by full blood, when they are descended
01:47from a common ancestor, that is male, because the next word is by the same wife, and by
01:55half blood, when they are descended from a common ancestor, but by different wives.
02:03We can never reconcile this provision.
02:07Because it says, biologically, one man has given birth to a child through a biological
02:15woman.
02:16That's what they say.
02:17Number two, marriage between lesbians, this provision will be redundant because she can't
02:24have full blood.
02:27Even if there is a child from artificial insemination, it would not be a full blood child.
02:35So merely changing man and woman into persons will make many provisions not reconcilable
02:43at all.
02:45Indian Succession Act undisputably applies to all, except Hindus.
02:50Hindu would be governed by the Hindu Succession Act.
02:54In a given situation, if he marries Hindu, otherwise Indian Succession Act.
02:59Now this also, kindly just one or two sections, just for the flavor.
03:04Domicile acquired by woman on marriage.
03:06By marriage, a woman acquires the domicile of her husband, if she had not the same domicile
03:12before.
03:13So it will have to be decided who is the woman.
03:19Wife's domicile during marriage.
03:21A wife's domicile during her marriage follows the domicile of her husband.
03:26For passports, etc., etc., this issue would arise and you will have to decide who is the
03:31wife.
03:32I am not reading all, but my Lord, Succession Act provides for widow, widower, husband,
03:39wife, father, mother, etc., my Lord.
03:4433A.
03:45A widow, but no linear descendant and the net value of his property does not exceed
03:51father.
03:52The whole of his property shall belong to the widow.
03:54Now, my Lord, if in this relationship one partner dies, whether he leaves behind a widow
04:01or a widower, then, my Lord, your Lordship may see 43 at the foot.
04:10In the interstates, father is dead, but the interstates, mother is living.
04:15Now, my Lord, next generation, marriage is permitted, they adopt and someone dies.
04:25And father and mother is, my Lord, LGBTQ couple.
04:30Who will be treated as dead as father and who will be treated as dead as mother?
04:36This would be the, my Lord, dilemma and can't be, my Lord, foreseen by your Lordships.