The Vishwa Hindu Parishad’s (VHP) legal cell passed a resolution against same-sex marriage saying the “tearing hurry” with which the Supreme Court is hearing petitions for legal recognition of such unions is not appropriate.
The legal cell of the Hindu outfit, in its annual meet attended by over 500 advocates and retired judges, on April 24 said the apex court should have sought the opinion of religious leaders and experts from diverse fields.
The VHP said it believes that there is no grave urgency to decide and determine the case related to same-sex marriage, when the country is still facing several other important issues in the socio-economic sphere.
While the country faces issues “related to eradication of poverty, implementation of basic and free education to all citizens, right to pollution-free environment, and problem of population control, there is no urgency shown nor judicial activism seen on the part of SC”, it added.
The affiliate of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) maintained that India is a country of divergent religions, castes, sub-castes which for centuries together have recognised only marriage amongst biological males and females. The institution of marriage is not only a union of two heterosexuals but also the advancement of the human race, it added.
Also read: SC side-steps Centre’s push to leave same-sex marriage decision to Parliament
“In India the marriage is not merely a union of two individuals but also a union of two families and the reputation of the families is being tested on the basis of marriages in their respective families. Marriages in India are celebrated like festivals from time immemorial, which will not be possible in the cases if same-sex marriage is allowed,” the VHP added.
VHP also stated that the LGBTQIA+ community is seeking to create a right within the Special Marriage Act, 1954, when the said Act applies only to “biological male and female”. Hence, any attempt to read down/strike down any provision of the Act and to newly define a particular provision under the Act “will clearly amount to rewriting the Act and taking over the power to legislate from the Parliament”.
Also read: Supreme Court must let legislature decide on same-sex marriage, say Bar Council of India
The organisation said people should not forget that India is being governed by the Constitution and there is a clear separation of powers given in the Constitution, as per which the legislative function is entrusted to the Parliament and State Legislatures and not to the Supreme Court or High Courts. It added that the present case is clearly an effort to encroach onto the sovereign powers of Parliament with the intention to direct Parliament to legislate in favour of same sex marriages.
“Recently in another matter related to reservation to Dalits who converted to Christianity or Islam, the Supreme Court is compelling Parliament to accept recommendations of a particular report which was dumped by the Parliament 16 years back during the same government that appointed the Commission,” the VHP further said.
The marriage is a socio-legal institution which can be created, recognised, conferred with legal sanctity and regulated only by competent legislature in exercise of its power under Article 246 of the Constitution of India. The recognition of human relations like that of a “marriage” is essentially a legislative function and the courts cannot either create or recognise any institution called “marriage” either by way of a judicial interpretation or striking down/reading down the existing legislative framework for the marriages.
The VHP maintained that the Indian cultural civilisation has constantly been attacked for centuries but survived against all odds. Now in independent India it is facing attacks on its cultural roots by the superimposition of western thoughts, philosophies and practices which are not viable for this nation.
“In light of the aforesaid, we express our deepest anguish on the haste shown by the Supreme Court on this issue. Instead of catering to the pending backlog of cases and undertaking crucial reforms to ensure access to justice and to resolve issues affecting the credibility of Judiciary, critical judicial time and infrastructure is being spent on such fanciful issues which is totally unwarranted,” the resolution further reads.
