Same sex couple could very well form a family: Madras High Court
The Supreme Court might not have legalised same sex marriage, but such couples could very well form a family, the Madras High Court said recently.
The bench of Justices GR Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayan said that in the Supriya Chakraborty Vs Union of India case the Supreme Court might not have legalised same sex marriage, but such couples could very well form a family.
According to the Live Law, the bench was dealing with a habeas corpus petition filed by a woman stating that her lesbian lover's father had been detaining her against her will and thus approached the court to set the detenu at liberty.
The detenu informed the court that she was forcibly taken to her home, beaten, and forced to undergo certain rituals to make her "normal." She also informed the court that she wished to go with the petitioner.
Considering the detenu's wish, the court closed the plea and restrained the detenu's family from interfering with her personal liberty. The court also asked the police to extend adequate protection to the petitioner and the detenu as and when required.
The court observed that the concept of "family" has to be understood expansively and marriage is not the sole mode to start a family.
The bench also expressed discomfort in associating the word "queer" with homosexual persons. The court said that the sexual orientation of a homosexual person must be perfectly normal for him/her/them and wondered why it should be associated with the word "queer" which means "strange" or "odd."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
16 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Salwa Judum case: Legislative workaround and limits of contempt power
The doctrine of separation of powers must always be acknowledged in a constitutional democracy, the Supreme Court said in its May 15 order ruling that any law made by Parliament or state legislatures cannot be held to be in contempt of court. The decision by a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma came while dismissing a 2012 contempt petition filed by sociologist Nandini Sundar and others against the Chhattisgarh government for enacting the Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011, alleging the law violated an earlier SC order. The bench held that the law did not amount to contempt of the SC's 2011 landmark judgment that disbanded the state government-backed Salwa Judum, terming it unconstitutional. Salwa Judum was a government-backed militia formed in Chhattisgarh in 2005, which used armed tribal civilians to combat Maoist violence. The contempt plea claimed that the Chhattisgarh government failed to comply with the 2011 order to stop open backing of vigilante groups like the Salwa Judum, and instead went ahead and armed tribal youths in the fight against Maoists. It said there had been a clear contempt of the SC order when the state government passed the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011, which legalised arming tribals in the form of Special Police Officers (SPOs) in the war against Maoists. The petitioners further submitted that instead of disarming SPOs, which was a key constituent of the SC's 2011 order, the Chhattisgarh government legalised the practice of arming them. They also argued that the victims of the Salwa Judum movement had not been adequately compensated. In the latest ruling of May 15, the Supreme Court said the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011 does not constitute a contempt of court per se, and that the balance between sovereign functionaries must always be delicately maintained. 'Every State Legislature has plenary powers to pass an enactment and so long as the said enactment has not been declared to be ultra vires the Constitution or, in any way, null and void by a Constitutional Court, the said enactment would have the force of law," the bench said. If any party wants that the legislation be struck down for being unconstitutional, the legal remedies would have to be presented before an appropriate constitutional court, the bench noted.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Aarti money dispute continues at Anjanadri temple
K oppal: A dispute has emerged regarding the rightful claim to dakshine (offering money) placed on the aarti plate at Sri Anjaneyanaswamy Temple in Anjanadri, Gangavathi taluk. Following a Supreme Court ruling, priest Vidyadas Baba was permitted to conduct puja from 6am to 8pm. During these hours, he solely manages the temple. However, there is uncertainty about the collection of monetary offerings placed on the aarti plate during deity darshan. Previously, Vidyadas Baba served as the chief priest when private individuals managed the temple. The situation changed after the state govt transferred the control to the muzrai department through a notification on Jan 18, 2018. Contesting his removal as unlawful, Vidyadas Baba pursued legal action. The Supreme Court recently issued an interim order, reinstating his authority to perform puja. This development displaced the department priest. While Vidyadas Baba now conducts puja and receives offerings on the aarti plate, temple executive officer MH Prakash maintains that these funds should go to the muzrai department. However, as the court order lacks specific instructions regarding this matter, Vidyadas Baba continues collecting the offerings. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like California: Gov Will Cover Your Cost To Install Solar If You Live In These Zips SunValue Learn More Undo Recently, the executive officer, along with ASI Prakash, visited the temple and directed Vidyadas Baba that he is not allowed to use the aarti plate offerings. The Mangalaarti must be performed solely for those devotees who have an aarti receipt, he said. Vidyadas Baba has opposed these restrictions and recorded the officials' statement. He questioned the additional constraints despite the Supreme Court's permission to perform puja and indicated his intention to report this to the court. Hence, the question of who owns the money placed on the aarti plate has now become problematic. "As the govt provides a salary to the priest, the funds on the aarti plate are not his property. They are the temple's assets," explained executive officer MH Prakash. Since Vidyadas Baba is functioning as a priest under a provisional order, he should not be classified as an employee of the muzrai department. "In this context, I depend on the offerings that land on the aarti plate for my income. If I cannot take it, then who will compensate me for my services?" asked Vidyadas. This issue has sparked dispute among the involved parties. Consequently, executive officer MH Prakash has asked the muzrai department to provide guidance on this matter. There are indications that the uncertainty will persist until a resolution is reached.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Edu council issues 5-point norms to strengthen safety in Bihar schools
Patna: To enhance students' safety and ensure a secured environment, Bihar Education Project Council (BEPC) has issued fresh directives to all district education officers (DEOs) and district programme officers (DPOs), mandating strict adherence to the "School Safety and Protection Guidelines – 2021". "This is in line with Supreme Court directives and National Education Policy 2020. Every school must now adhere strictly to the prescribed standards," said state project director Mayank Warwade in a letter to all DEOs and DPOs across the state. The guidelines cover five broad areas, including infrastructure, health, emotional safety, cybersecurity and disaster management. Warwade said the infrastructure includes boundary walls and emergency exits from the schools. "Health and physical security requires schools to provide first aid kits, conduct regular health check-ups and maintain comprehensive health cards for each student. The emotional safety stresses classroom monitoring and age-appropriate education on personal safety, including the difference between "good touch" and "bad touch". Cybersecurity protocols talks about computer labs with internet access," he said. Talking about the disaster management guidelines, the project director said all schools must now have a disaster management plan and conduct mock drills regularly. "We want students and staff to be prepared, not panicked, in an emergency situation," he said, adding that the full guideline is available for download on the Union education ministry's website and will be monitored for compliance.
