Appearing for a petitioner, Senior Advocate Raju Ramachandran stressed the need for protection of same-sex couples from their families.
“The recognition of their marriage is an important protection to them in addition to societal recognition, which protects them from society and parental families. Any judgment of this Court will be incomplete unless a protocol is put in place like how heterosexual couples seek protection from khap panchayats.“
Senior Advocate KV Viswanathan, appearing for another petitioner, argued that procreation should not be considered a valid defence to negate any right to marriage for same-sex couples.
“Marriage is coming together of two souls and to be told that it is to be looked at from a procreation purpose is completely fallacious…Gay, lesbian, LGBTQIA people are adept at raising children compared to heterosexual couples.“
He added that the age of marriage for the third gender should be kept at 18, and that states will have to make laws in accordance with any declared fundamental right to marry.
Source: Barandbench
