On October 17, 2023, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant verdict stating that the Indian Constitution does not recognize the right to marry as a fundamental right for any individual, regardless of their sexual orientation. This ruling has implications for the ongoing discourse around marriage equality in India.
The case in question involved petitioners Abhay and Supriyo, who challenged the existing legal framework on marriage and sought acknowledgment of marriage equality. Their argument centered on whether the right to marry should be classified as a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution, especially in light of recent judicial interpretations that have expanded personal freedoms.
Prior to this ruling, the Supreme Court had established a progressive approach to related issues concerning personal rights:
In the ruling of Supriyo Chakraborty v Union of India, the Supreme Court distinguished between the right to choose a partner and the right to marry. The court emphasized that while individuals are free to choose their cohabitation partners, this does not equate to a fundamental right to marry. This clarification marks an important moment in Indian legal history, as it refrains from extending the interpretation of fundamental rights to include explicit marriage rights.
The Supreme Court's decision is notable for its selective engagement with international human rights standards. Despite India being a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)—both of which recognize the right to marry as a human right—the court chose not to base its ruling on these international frameworks.
In conclusion, the ruling in Supriyo Chakraborty v Union of India establishes a clear judicial position that the right to marry is not recognized as a fundamental right within the Indian constitutional framework. This reflects a conservative interpretation of marriage rights, even as other areas of personal freedom and dignity are increasingly embraced.
Q1. What did the Supreme Court rule about the right to marry?
Answer: The Supreme Court ruled that the right to marry is not recognized as a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution, impacting discussions on marriage equality.
Q2. What was the basis for the court's decision?
Answer: The court distinguished between the right to choose a partner and the right to marry, asserting that personal freedoms do not necessarily extend to marriage rights.
Q3. How does this ruling compare to previous cases?
Answer: Previous rulings acknowledged personal freedoms related to relationships but did not extend those rights explicitly to marriage, maintaining a conservative interpretation.
Q4. Does this ruling affect LGBTQ+ rights in India?
Answer: Yes, the ruling impacts LGBTQ+ rights by clarifying that marriage is not a fundamental right, despite decriminalization of homosexuality in prior cases.
Q5. What international laws relate to the right to marry?
Answer: The UDHR and ICCPR recognize the right to marry as a human right, but the Indian Supreme Court did not reference these in its ruling.
Question 1: What did the Supreme Court state regarding the right to marry?
A) It is a fundamental right
B) It is not a fundamental right
C) It is a constitutional right
D) It is a basic human right
Correct Answer: B
Question 2: Which case recognized privacy as a fundamental right?
A) Lata Singh v Union of India
B) Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India
C) Justice KS Puttaswamy (retd) v. Union of India
D) Shakti Vahini v. Union of India
Correct Answer: C
Question 3: What was the core argument of the petitioners in the case?
A) Right to privacy
B) Right to marry as a fundamental right
C) Right to inter-caste marriage
D) Right to choose a partner
Correct Answer: B
Kutos : AI Assistant!
