Post

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
Click again on or Share Via icon
Click on Copy Link to Tweet
Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
More info at Twitter Help

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Sep 14, 2020 • 13 tweets • 4 min read • Read on X

Scrolly

@Iyervval

Delhi HC begins hearing a PIL to recognise same-sex marriage under Hindu Marriage Act.

#samesexmarriage #homosexuality #LGBT

@Iyervval

He are seeking to impose marriage equality under Hindu Marriage Act. The Act does not say that marriage has to take place between a man and a woman: Adv Raghav Awasthi for the Petitioners.

#samesexmarriage

Benefits available to heterosexual are thus not available to homosexual couples: Awasthi

Have any homosexual couples applied for marriage registration but were denied? : Court

Yes, but they were not willing to come before the Court. Thus, the PIL: Awasthi

My instructions are that such marriages are not being registered: Awasthi

What Petitioners are seeking cannot ve granted: SG Tushar Mehta

Our legal system, society and values do not recognise marriage between same sex couples : SG Tushar Mehta

SG Tushar Mehta reads the section of degree of prohibited relationships under Hindu Marriage Act, says it refers to "man" and "woman".

At the moment, we are asking that is a PIL maintainable.: Court

I checked up the law. Court can't legislate : SG Mehta

I won't even file an affidavit. I will rely on statutory provisions: SG Mehta

Court may bear in mind that Surpreme Court only decriminalized homosexuality. Nothing more or less: SG Mehta

The Supreme Court gave reasons: Justice Prateek Jalan

If there are any aggrieved persons, they can can come. No question of a PIL : Court

You give names of such persons: Court

One of the petitioners, Mr Gopi Shankar is trying to get his marriage registered. I will take instructions: Awasthi.

Court grants time to the Petitioners to submit list of persons who are aggrieved by non registration of same sex marriage under HMA.

Matter adjourned till Oct 21
.

@Iyervval

Our legal system, values do not recognise same-sex marriage: SG Tushar Mehta tells Delhi HC

barandbench.com/news/litigatio…

@Iyervval #tusharmehta #marriage

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @barandbench

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Mar 21

Supreme Court Bar Association flags off its first National Conference on the theme “reimagining judicial governance: strengthening institutions for democratic justice”.

Justice Mehta: if a true picture is provided to litigants by lawyers at the first stage the chances of mediation succeeding would increase manifold.

Justice Mehta: But the most stumbling roadblock is the government. The experience in the national Lok Adalats where we hold pre-litigation mediation sessions is sad to say the least. There is hardly a single department of this government which comes forward with a positive response.

Read 90 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Mar 19

The person who is an accused is praying for protection? You are a suspected accused. You are trying to sensationalise the issue: Uttarakhand High Court to gym owner ‘Mohammad’ Deepak Kumar

The Court is hearing a plea filed by Kumar seeking quashing of an FIR agains him.

I have been receiving consistent threats: Kumar’s counsel
You are investigation: Court
That is a different thing: Counsel

Read 17 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Mar 18

[Day 2]: A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court to resume hearing reference on the interpretation of “industry” under the Industrial Disputes Act, in the State of UP v. Jai Bir Singh batch of cases
#SupremeCourt

What happened on Day 1? Read here: barandbench.com/news/expansive…

Sr Adv Sanjay Hegde makes submissions
#SupremeCourt

Read 6 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Mar 17

A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court begins hearing reference on the interpretation of “industry” under the Industrial Disputes Act, in the State of UP v. Jai Bir Singh batch of cases
#SupremeCourt

Sr Adv CU Singh: There are two notifications ... Now the old industrial disputes act has been repealed.

Sr Adv Indira Jaising: Any judgment rendered by the court in interpretation of the old law will impact the new law. One side seeks reconsideration of Bangalore water supply and one side says no such reconsideration needed.

CJI: While taking a view on Bangalore water supply .. we can give a word of caution that the interpretation is for the law which used to exist

Jaising: There is an unavoidable overlap. All conclusions should be without prejudice.

AG R Venkataramani: so whether a challenge to the new law can lie when there is no such challenge before this court

AG: I have placed my written submissions and compilations for the Court’s consideration; I will be referring in particular to Volumes 4B and 5B. The principal issue, as framed, is whether an undertaking or enterprise falls within the definition of “industry” under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act and what the correct legal position is. A second, distinct issue arises from the 1982 Amendment, particularly in the context of social welfare activities and governmental functions, and whether such activities fall within the expression “enterprise.” This in turn raises the question of what constitutes a “sovereign function” of the State and whether such functions are excluded from the ambit of Section 2(j). To address this, it is necessary to go back to the earlier reference order and the line of judgments beginning with Bangalore Water Supply.

Read 16 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Mar 13

Delhi High Court modifies bail conditions imposed on accused Neelam Azad in parliament security breach case.

The matter was listed before Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar.

The matter pertains to an incident in which some persons entered the parliament building and threw smoke canisters when the Lok Sabha was in session. Azad was arrested by the Delhi Police on December 13, 2023 and granted bail in July 2025 subject to conditions.

Read 13 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Mar 13

Supreme Court hears the case regarding mandatory requirement of three years' practice at the Bar as a uniform eligibility condition for entry-level judicial service posts

Sr Adv Sidharth Bhatnagar, Amicus: High Courts are of the view that three years should remain. But for disability ..some accessibility needs to be given. Allahabad HC says it is not capable at the moment it is too early for a view. Delhi HC says three year practice has been reintroduced as in terms of SC judgment. Committee says relaxation for disabled may lead to disparity

Amicus: Faizan Mustafa for CNLU says no experience needed at all and should be done away with.

Sr Adv Pinky Anand: This practice is not even consistent to their skills of being adjudicators. Thus this is a Roadblock. Average age of aspirant will be 29.

Read 12 tweets

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Bar and Bench

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @barandbench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!