Question

In October 2023, two individuals in India, Ramesh and Sameer, who identify as a same-sex couple, sought to legally solemnize their marriage. Based on the Supreme Court's ruling, what is the current legal standing of their ability to marry?

• A. Their marriage is legally recognized nationwide under a new constitutional right
• B. Their marriage is not legally recognized, as the Supreme Court ruled that this issue is for Parliament to address
• C. Their marriage is recognized only if both of them identify as transgender
• D. Their marriage is temporarily recognized until Parliament decides otherwise
• A. The Court acknowledged the right to choose a partner, therefore it would agree to legislate on marriage
• B. The Court held that there is no fundamental right to marry under the Indian Constitution, and such a policy can be made only by the Parliament
• C. The Court has held that it will set up a panel to look into the fundamental right to marry
• D. The Court upheld the fundamental right to marry, but declined to recognise same sex marriage
• A. The Supreme Court of India, as they are ultimately responsible for interpreting constitutional rights
• B. The President of India as head of the Union legislature
• C. The Parliament and state legislatures, as the power to legislate on same-sex marriage rests with them
• D. The National Commission for Human Rights, to advocate for a new directive
• A. The automatic right to inheritance for same-sex partners
• B. The right of same-sex couples to adopt children jointly
• C. The right of same-sex couples to cohabit privately
• D. The right to maintenance for same-sex partners
• A. They must first register their union with the government panel that was urged to be formed
• B. They cannot legally marry and therefore cannot automatically be entitled to these specific legal rights
• C. These rights are only available to same-sex couples where one partner is transgender
• D. They can receive these benefits if they convert to a religion that recognizes same-sex unions
• A. Intersex and Asexual
• B. Initialisms and Agender
• C. Intersex and Ally
• D. Intrasex and Androgynous

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

In the 2023 judgment {Supriyo v. Union of India}, the Supreme Court held that: \begin{itemize} \item There is no fundamental right to marry under the Constitution. \item Recognition of same-sex marriage is a matter for Parliament and State Legislatures, not the judiciary. \item The Court cannot create a legal framework for marriage or civil unions. \end{itemize} Therefore, Ramesh and Sameer cannot legally marry in India at present.

Answer 2

In the 2023 judgment {Supriyo v. Union of India}, the Supreme Court clarified: \begin{itemize} \item The right to choose a partner is protected under Article 21, but it does not create a fundamental right to marry. \item Marriage is a legal institution created by statute, not by the Constitution. \item Therefore, any recognition of same-sex marriage must come from Parliament or the State Legislatures, not the judiciary. \end{itemize} Thus, the Court would reject the advocate's argument and hold that it cannot legislate marriage rights.

Answer 3

In {Supriyo v. Union of India} (2023), the Supreme Court held that: \begin{itemize} \item The judiciary cannot create a legal framework for same-sex marriage. \item Marriage is a statutory creation, not a fundamental right. \item Therefore, only the Parliament and State Legislatures have the authority to enact a law recognizing same-sex marriage. \end{itemize} Thus, advocacy efforts must be directed toward the **legislatures**, not the courts or commissions.

Answer 4

In the 2023 judgment {Supriyo v. Union of India}, the Supreme Court: \begin{itemize} \item Reaffirmed that same-sex couples have the right to cohabit, protected under the rights to privacy, dignity, and personal liberty (Articles 19 and 21). \item Declined to recognize same-sex marriage. \item Did not grant automatic inheritance, adoption, or maintenance rights. \end{itemize} Hence, the only right explicitly affirmed is the **right to cohabit**.

Answer 5

In the 2023 judgment {Supriyo v. Union of India}, the Supreme Court held that: \begin{itemize} \item Same-sex couples cannot legally marry under current Indian law. \item Marriage-linked rights—such as automatic inheritance, family pension, maintenance, and next-of-kin status—flow only from statutory marriage. \item Since marriage is not legally recognized for same-sex couples, these benefits cannot automatically apply. \end{itemize} Therefore, the primary obstacle is the **absence of legal marriage**, which prevents access to all automatic marital benefits.

Answer 6

The expanded acronym LGBTQIA+ stands for: \begin{itemize} \item L — Lesbian \item G — Gay \item B — Bisexual \item T — Transgender \item Q — Queer/Questioning \item I — Intersex \item A — Asexual (also sometimes interpreted as Ally, but the formal expansion is Asexual) \end{itemize} Thus, the letters ‘I’ and ‘A’ refer to **Intersex** and **Asexual**.