The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed review petitions against its October 2023 judgement refusing to legalise same-sex marriages.

A bench of Justices BR Gavai, Surya Kant, BV Nagarathna, PS Narasimha and Dipankar Datta said it had carefully gone through the judgements delivered in the matter.

“We do not find any error apparent on the face of the record,” the court said. “We further find that the view expressed in both the judgments is in accordance with law and as such, no interference is warranted.”

Delivering its verdict on petitions seeking legal recognition for same-sex marriages, a five-judge Constitution bench headed by then Chief Justice DY Chandrachud ruled on October 17, 2023, that the issue must be decided by Parliament and that there was no fundamental right to marriage.

Apart from Chandrachud, the bench comprised Justices SK Kaul, Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and Narasimha. All but Narasimha have since retired.

The petitioners had argued that the country’s marriage laws discriminated against the LGBTQIA+ community and infringed on their fundamental right to dignity and privacy. They had sought an amendment to the Special Marriage Act, 1954, for legal recognition of same-sex marriages.

The judgement included four opinions. Of the four opinions, the one by Bhat on behalf of himself and Kohli, was the majority opinion since it was also fully endorsed by Narasimha.

As per judicial custom, the directions contained in the majority opinion are what the state is obliged to follow.

The opinions by Chandrachud and Kaul, in consonance with each other, differed from the majority on two key areas: the legal recognition of same-sex unions and adoption by same-sex couples. These minority opinions, which are not legally enforceable, directed the state to legally recognise same-sex unions and interpret the Adoption Regulations, 2022, to facilitate adoption by same-sex couples. The majority opinion, however, stuck to the status quo on both these points.

The challenge to provisions of the Special Marriage Act was unanimously turned down by the top court.

Chandrachud directed the Union and state governments to ensure that members of the queer community were not discriminated against because of their identity. He also directed the authorities to sensitise the public about queer rights, to create a hotline for the queer community, to create safe houses for queer couples and to ensure that inter-sex children were not forced to undergo sex-change operations.

The court also recorded a statement from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that the Union government would form a committee to decide the rights and entitlements of persons in queer unions.

The review petitions filed against the verdict said that it suffered from “errors” and was “self-contradictory and manifestly unjust”, The Indian Express reported.

“The majority judgement overlooks that marriage, at its core, is an enforceable social contract,” the petitioners said. “The right to so contract is available to anyone capable of consenting. Adults of any faith or no faith may engage in it. No one group of people may define for another what marriage means.”

It added that “no contract, nor forceful state action like imprisonment, may curtail an adult’s fundamental right to marry”.

Also read: Explainer: Why the Supreme Court ​​refused to legalise same-sex marriages