The Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta welcomed the Supreme Court's judgement to not recognise same-sex marriages.
Following the Supreme Court's judgement on Tuesday that denied same-sex marriage rights, top Hindu and Muslim religious leaders welcomed the verdict while the queer community expressed disappointment and said their fight for their rights would continue.
The Narendra Modi government, which consistently opposed any recognition to same-sex marriages, also welcome the SC judgement. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta "wholeheartedly welcomed" the judgement.
Anjali Gopalan, one of the petitioners, said she remains hopeful, but said it is disappointing that no progressive ruling came even on the issue of adoption. Another queer activist, Anish Gawande, said that while declarations regarding transgenders were made, denial of even adoption amounted to discrimination.
In its judgement, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that there was no fundamental right to marry for same-sex persons. In a 3-2 judgement, the Apex Court also ruled against civil unions and adoption rights. The verdict left the question of the recognition for the legislature to decide.
A government committee, which the Modi government had proposed during the hearings, would look into the concerns of same-sex persons and address the issues such as adoption and succession.
Members of the LGBTQIA+ community said that their fight for equal rights will go on despite the verdict on Tuesday.
Lawyers Karuna Nandi said that the opportunities today with the SC was lost as the matter was pushed off to the legislators and the Modi government has already made its stand on the issue clear. She reiterated that Congress and other governments in power in the states have opportunities to bring into law the recognition of a partner's rights to make medical decisions and other issues of employment and non-discrimination as it is in their jurisdiction.
"There were some opportunities today that I believe has been pushed off to the legislators and the central govt has made their stand clear with regards to marriage, we hope that their committee will ensure that civil unions are recognised and concomitants of marriage are then brought into law at least with regards to civil unions. I will also say that Congress and other govts in power in the states have many opportunities to bring into law the recognition of a partner's rights to make medical decisions because they can legislate on health, they can look at employment non-discrimination, there is a lot that can be done...if we heard anything that was unanimous it was that queer citizens have rights...rights of queer citizens must be protected and state govts can protect them," said Nandi, as per ANI.
Anish Gawande, a prominent queer activist, acknowledged the important declarations made on transgender persons having the right to marry and that restricting adoption to heterosexual couples amounts to discrimination. "Committees without a clear timeframe, a clear composition, and a clear locus of authority are pointless. The Supreme Court has merely rehashed what the Solicitor General promised during hearings. Ball is now in the government's court," the activist said in a post on 'X'.
One of the petitioners and activist Anjali Gopalan says, "Regarding adoption also nothing was done, what the CJI said was very good regarding adoption but it's disappointing that other justices didn't agree...this is democracy but we are denying basic rights to our own citizens."
Rohin Bhatt, a non-binary queer rights activist and lawyer, said that the community would rise in rage and protest against the decision. "Today the court has reaffirmed that queer citizens will be relegated to an unsympathetic legislature and an apathetic executive. We are second class citizens, no matter how many judicial platitudes say otherwise. We will rise in rage and protest," he said in a post on 'X'.
Another activist and petitioner in the case, Harish Iyer, said that while the court's ruling was not in the favour of the queer community, certain conversations made by the bench were.
"They have also put the responsibility on Central govt and Central govt's Solicitor General said so many things against us so it is important for us to go to our elected govt, MPs and MLAs and tell them we are as different as two people. War is underway...it might take sometime but we will get societal equality," Iyer told reporters.
Senior advocate Geeta Luthra, who appeared for some of the petitioners, told ANI, "Even if the right to marriage has not been given, CJI has said that the same bundle of rights which every married couple has should be available to same-sex couples."
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta welcomed the judgement of the Supreme Court and praised it.
"I wholeheartedly welcome the judgment. I am happy that my stand has been accepted. All four judgements have taken the jurisprudence of our nation and the intellectual exercise which went into writing the judgments to the next level. There are very few courts in the world where one can expect this level of intellectual and scholarly judicial exercise. This judgement would be read across jurisdictions," said Mehta, as per ANI.
The Modi government has consistently opposed the same-sex marriages. It said earlier that the recognition to same-sex marriages would "create havoc" in the society and the petitioners represented "urban elite" and not the majority of the country. It also said that such decisions were the domain of the Parliament, not Judiciary.
Vishva Hindu Parishad's International Working President Alok Kumar said he was happy with the judgement.
"Those who call themselves progressive, those who look at the West, those who do not have an understanding of Indian family structures, they had filed writs and had said that if two boys or two girls are together so their relations would be recognised as marriage and such marriages should also recognised. For this, a provision of the Special Marriage Act was challenged. Such relationships cannot be marriages. Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, and other Indian organisations became party in the case and opposed it in the court...I am happy that the Supreme Court has observed that the relationship between two boys or two girls cannot be recognised as a marriage," said Kumar to PTI.
Similarly, top Muslim cleric Maulana Sajid Rashidi also opposed the same-sex marriages are Western practices and cannot be allowed in India. Before the verdict was known, he urged the Supreme Court to not approve such marriages and also said the decriminalisation of homosexuality was wrong.
"The practice [of same-sex marriages] does not represent the Indian culture and is, in fact, an idea borrowed from the West. The Europeans and the West are open about these things but such practices should never be encouraged or allowed in India...The decision to decrminalise same-sex marriage in 2018 was wrong. The practice should never have been removed from the criminal category. It is unnatural for a person to marry another person of his gender. Nature (Kudrat) made boys and girls different. This (pleas seeking SC nod to same-sex marriage) is nothing but an attempt to vitiate Indian culture. I urge the Supreme Court to criminalise the practice," said Rashidi before the verdict came out, as per ABP News.