Same-Sex Marriage Case Judgment : Live Updates From Supreme Court

CJI DY Chandrachud : My learned brother has also failed to ascertain if the CARA regulation is discriminatory

CJI DY Chandrachud : My learned brother acknowledges the discrimination against the queer couples but does not issue directions. I cannot come to terms with such an approach.

CJI DY Chandrachud : My learned brother (Justice Bhat) also acknowledges that the State is discriminating against the queer community but does not exercise the powers under Article 32 to alleviate their plight.

CJI DY Chandrachud : Contrary to Justice Bhat's judgment, directions in my judgment does not result in the creation of an institution, rather they give effect to the fundamental rights under Part 3 of the Constitution.

CJI DY Chandrachud says he has a disagreement with the judgment of Justice Ravindra Bhat.

CJI DY Chandrachud : Law cannot assume that only heterosexual couples can be good parents. This would amount to discrimination. So the adoption regulations are violative of the constitution for discrimination against queer couples.

CJI DY Chandrachud : Law cannot assume that only heterosexual couples can be good parents. This would amount to discrimination. So the adoption regulations are violative of the constitution for discrimination against queer couples.

CJI DY Chandrachud : 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 queer community.

CJI DY Chandrachud : There is no material on record to prove that only a married heterosexual couple can provide stability to a child.

CJI : It cannot be assumed that unmarried couples are not serious about their relationship.