The Controversy of Adoption Rights for Queer Couples: A Closer Look at the Recent Supreme Court Decision

Adoption rights for queer couples have long been a contentious issue in many parts of the world, including India. The recent Supreme Court judgment in India on same-sex marriages and the rights of unmarried and queer couples to jointly adopt children has stirred a mix of hope and disappointment within the LGBTQ+ community and its supporters. In this SEO-optimized long-form article, we delve deep into the complexities of this ruling, the dissenting opinions, and the implications it holds for adoption rights in India.

Understanding the Supreme Court Decision

Table of Contents

In a historic judgment, the Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, emphasized that the law should not assume that only heterosexual couples can be good parents. He argued that doing so would amount to discrimination. This progressive stance raised hope within the LGBTQ+ community and its advocates, as it appeared that the Supreme Court was ready to consider granting adoption rights to unmarried and queer couples.

However, this hope was short-lived as three of the five judges on the bench disagreed with the Chief Justice and Justice SK Kaul on this crucial issue. The Chief Justice began reading out his judgment by acknowledging that there was a degree of agreement and disagreement among the judges. The primary point of contention was the extent to which the court should go in ensuring adoption rights for queer couples.

The Judges’ Standpoints

The bench, headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, along with Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha, expressed unanimous agreement on one aspect: that granting legal recognition to same-sex marriages should be a matter for the legislature and that the Special Marriages Act could not be read down. They also suggested the formation of a committee to address practical concerns of same-sex couples, such as obtaining ration cards, pension, gratuity, and addressing succession issues.

The crux of the disagreement lay in whether unmarried and queer couples should have the right to jointly adopt a child.

Chief Justice DY Chandrachud’s Stand

Justice Chandrachud, in his judgment, argued that the right to enter into a union should not be restricted based on sexual orientation. He asserted that unmarried couples, including queer couples, should have the right to jointly adopt a child. He emphasized that the law should not assume that only heterosexual couples can provide a stable and loving environment for a child. He also pointed out that the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) guidelines did not explicitly bar unmarried couples from adopting and that there was no proof that this was against the best interests of the child.

Furthermore, he contended that CARA had exceeded its authority by restricting unmarried couples, thereby indirectly discriminating against atypical unions. Justice Chandrachud argued that such discrimination violated Article 15 of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.

Disagreement Among the Judges

While Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul agreed with the Chief Justice on the issue of adoption, there was a clear disagreement between Justice Chandrachud and Justice S Ravindra Bhat. The Chief Justice argued that his directions did not create a new institution but aimed to uphold fundamental rights under Part III of the Constitution. He noted that Justice Bhat acknowledged the discrimination against the queer community but did not use Article 32, which confers powers on the Supreme Court to issue orders for the enforcement of fundamental rights, to alleviate their plight.

Majority View

The majority opinion, as reflected in the judgments of Justices Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha, aligned with Justice Bhat’s stance. They disagreed with the Chief Justice’s position on the right of queer couples to adopt and upheld the constitutionality of CARA’s Regulation 5(3.

Justice Bhat emphasized that this did not imply that unmarried or non-heterosexual couples cannot be good parents. He noted that, in line with the objectives of Section 57, the State, as parens patriae (legal protector), must explore all avenues to ensure that all children in need of stable homes receive the benefits they deserve.

Conclusion

The recent Supreme Court judgment on adoption rights for queer couples has sparked a significant debate and left various questions unanswered. While Chief Justice DY Chandrachud’s progressive stance raised hope for equality and inclusivity, the majority view, supported by Justices Kohli and Narasimha, seems to lean in a different direction.

This complex issue highlights the ongoing struggle for LGBTQ+ rights in India and the need for a comprehensive and inclusive approach to adoption laws. The Supreme Court’s decision, with its degree of agreement and disagreement, indicates that the battle for adoption rights for queer couples is far from over, and it remains to be seen how the legislative and judicial systems will evolve in the coming years.

FAQ

1. What was the recent Supreme Court judgment regarding adoption rights for queer couples?

The recent Supreme Court judgment in India touched upon various aspects of LGBTQ+ rights, including the adoption rights of unmarried and queer couples. While there was a degree of agreement among the judges, the primary point of contention was whether unmarried and queer couples should have the right to jointly adopt a child.

2. Who were the key judges involved in this judgment?

The five-judge bench was headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and also comprised Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, S Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha. These judges had differing opinions on the matter.

Also Read Other Links : –

🔥HOME PAGE

👉 CLICK HERE

Rate this post