News

Same-Sex Marriage against Indian “Sanskars”, Says UP Govt; High Court Rejects Plea by Lesbian Couple

By Sukhdeep Singh

April 15, 2022

The Allahabad High Court has rejected the plea by a lesbian couple in their 20s who had urged the Court to recognise their same-sex marriage, after submissions were made by the Uttar Pradesh government opposing any such legal recognition of same-sex marriages.

The mother of one of the girls had filed a habeaus corpus plea in the High Court on April 6, 2022, alleging that her daughter was being illegally detained by the other. The court had asked both the girls to be present in the next hearing. On April 7th, the girls presented their case before the judges and said that they had got married according to Hindu Traditions and requested the court to recognise their marriage. They further contented that the Hindu Marriage Act talked about marriage of two people and was not gender specific.

However, the Additional Government Advocates opposed the pleas of the couple and said, “In Hindu culture, marriage is one of the ‘sanskar’ and can be performed between a man and a woman. Our country runs according to the Indian culture, religions, and Indian law. In India, marriage is considered a sacred ‘sanskar’, whereas in other countries, marriage is a contract.”

The state counsel further submitted that the Hindu Marriage Act talked about marriage between a woman and a man and in the absence of either of the two, marriage could not be accepted in any way, as it defied the Indian family concept, and that even Muslim, Buddhist, Jain, Sikh etc. religions have also not recognized homosexual marriage.

The state government also said in its submission that homosexual marriage does not produce children, and as per Hindu law, marriage is considered important in which both men and women live together and carry forward the human chain by reproducing.

Following the submissions, the High Court rejected the plea for the recognition of same-sex marriages, and also dismissed the Habeas Corpus plea and said that “judicial interference will cause “complete havoc with the delicate balance of personal laws”.