Same-Sex Marriage/Marriage Equality- Supreme Court Hearing- LIVE UPDATES - DAY-9

SG Mehta: Imagine a situation where your lordships declare the law. Your lordships will not be declaring the contours of regulations. Suppose someone goes to a priest for performing a ritual.

SG Mehta: One pastor refused to perform ceremony of marriage. He was sought to be prosecuted. They had to come out with a law for pastor's Protection.

SG Mehta: Your lordships may be aware of that Baker's case where the baker refused to bake a cake for a same sex couple, he was prosecuted. Similar thing happened after the judgement of American court.

SG Mehta: Any declaration would bind every individual in the country who is not before your lordships. In case of a law, every individual is represented by his chosen representative.

SG Mehta: Your lordships declaration would be within the meaning of law, binding the whole nation.

Adv Anson Thomas(intervenor): Chief justice of India should recuse from hearing this matter.

CJI DY Chandrachud: Application rejected.

SG Mehta: Since he has made the submission, I officially object to this submission.

Intervenors make their submissions.

Adv Shashank Jha: Marriage is not private, it's a social affair. Same sex marriage is expected in heterosexual society. But law, the heterosexual law is not competent. So you'd need new laws.

CJI DY Chandrachud: Okay, got it.

Thomas: In my corporate career, between the period of Naz and Kaushal, my company itself allowed employees to declare a partner for insurance. These are doable things without getting into aspect of marriage.

Thomas: There is no cause for the government to give privilege to relationships that claim to be in varied colours including multi partner relationships.