Washington DC (ANI): Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud on Monday said he stands by his minority view in favor of civil unions for gay couples as it is sometimes a “vote of conscience and a vote of the Constitution”. Is. , CJI Chandrachud spoke in the third debate on Comparative Constitutional Law on the topic “Perspectives of the Supreme Courts of India and the United States of America”.
The event was organized by Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
The CJI said, “I think sometimes it is a vote of conscience and a vote of the Constitution. And I stand by what I said.”
He also stood by the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Chamber’s decision during a hearing on a group of petitions seeking legal approval for gay marriage.
The court decided not to interfere with the special marriage law and let Parliament decide on the issue of granting marriage equality to same-sex couples.
The CJI also reiterated his minority decision to grant the right of association, while most of his colleagues in the court felt that recognizing the right to form unions was again beyond the traditional scope and should be left to Parliament.
He said his conclusions regarding gay couples’ rights to adopt were not supported by a majority of the court’s judges. The CJI also cited 13 cases where he was in the minority while delivering important judgements. “With the unanimous decision of the five judges at the Court, we conclude that we have made great progress in decriminalizing homosexuality and recognizing people from the gay community as equal partners in our society , the law has been made on “the”. CJI said, the right to marry comes within the purview of Parliament.
Dissenting from the court’s other three judges on the issue of civil unions and adoption rights for same-sex couples, the CJI said: “But my three colleagues felt that recognizing the right to form unions again went beyond the traditional sphere.” What is and what should be is left in the hands of Parliament”.
He said that his three colleagues also felt that the lack of recognition of adoption rights by gay unions was discriminatory, but that it was something that needed to be addressed by Parliament.
