“The court’s primary role is to assess the legality of existing legislation or laws. Without this examination, it becomes challenging for the court to intervene in this domain,” expressed the former judge.
During the India Today South 2023 Conclave, Justice Kurian Joseph, a retired Supreme Court justice, voiced his strong opposition to the concept of same-sex marriage. He emphasized that a union between two individuals of the same sex can only be considered an association and should not fall under the definition of marriage.
Justice Joseph, joined by retired Supreme Court judge Justice Jasti Chelameswar, made these statements during the conclave. When asked about whether the Supreme Court should have taken up the same-sex marriage case, Justice Joseph firmly stated his complete opposition to same-sex marriage.
He asserted that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, and any other relationship is merely a union or association. While same-sex couples can choose to live together as friends or in intimate relationships, the introduction of marriage as a concept changes the nature of the relationship.
Justice Joseph emphasized that marriage is a fundamental unit of society, primarily intended for procreation and recreation. He also clarified that marriage is not a fundamental right.
Regarding the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to hear the case, Justice Joseph acknowledged that the Court has the authority to do so. However, he emphasized that the primary responsibility of the court is to examine the constitutionality of laws and other executive actions in relation to the Constitution.
Justice Joseph highlighted that there is currently no law either prohibiting or recognizing same-sex marriage. Consequently, the decision to hear the case before the highest court has drawn criticism from those who argue that it amounts to judicial interference in the legislative realm.
Justice Chelameswar further elaborated on the perception of the “lakshman rekha” (boundary) between the executive and judicial branches, suggesting that it is merely rhetoric and perceived differently by those in and out of power. He pointed out that when the Supreme Court made the ruling in the SR Bommai case, those who were not in power praised it as an excellent constitutional decision. He emphasized that the true lakshman rekha is the Constitution itself, which delineates the functions of each organ of the government.
Justice Chelameswar emphasized that pending appeals filed by convicts should be given the highest priority as they directly impact personal freedom and liberty.
The Supreme Court constitution bench, led by CJI DY Chandrachud, reserved its decision on May 15 regarding a group of petitions seeking legal recognition of same-sex marriages.
