What is the Special Marriage Act that the Supreme Court is looking at? | Ep14 Laws of the Land
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 07. 2024
- The petitions demanding marriage equality for members of the LGBTQIA+ community before the Supreme Court raise several questions around the Special Marriage Act 1954.
Why was the law brought in and what does it say?
In the fourteenth episode of ThePrint's #Lawsoftheland, Supreme Court lawyer Nipun Saxena answers all these questions and more, with Bhadra Sinha and Apoorva Mandhani.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exclusive content, special privileges & more - Subscribe to ThePrint for Member benefits: theprint.in/subscribe/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connect with ThePrint
» Subscribe to ThePrint: theprint.in/subscribe/
» Subscribe to our CZcams Channel: bit.ly/3nCMpht
» Like us on Facebook: / theprintindia
» Tweet us on Twitter: / theprintindia
» Follow us on Instagram: / theprintindia
» Find us on LinkedIn : / theprint
» Subscribe to ThePrint on Telegram: t.me/ThePrintIndia
» Find us on Spotify: spoti.fi/2NMVlnB
» Find us on Apple Podcasts: apple.co/3pEOta8
These 26 minutes prove why UCC is required!
Good luck convincing the population.. in a democracy any law could decide the government to assume power.. Bringing UCC in a country this diverse will not be a reality, atleast not anytime in the near future... Imagine subsuming or replacing the Hindu Marriage Act, The Muslim personal law on marriage, the Christian marriage act, the Parsi marriage act, etc all under one uniform civil law for marriage.. that's what Special marriage law is reflecting on.. if even Ambedkar couldn't convince the legislators with the Hindu Code Bill.. how on earth can the government convince the people today?? U think if we remove the Hindu marriage act or the Muslim law marriage etc the people gonna quiet with a unifiorm law? It's not pragmatic today
@@kalebj7001 Let the legislation do it's job. Muslim males can keep 4 wives and are not subject to the offence of IPC section 494. This is not secularism for a healthy democracy ...though we are no healthy democracy at all.
Incredible discussion. Thank you for your insights Nipun sir.
How do we track/ retrieve past episodes, it’s quite a task.
Very good discussion. Thank you very much for educating SPL marriages Act,in the light of same sex marriage.
Apoorva, that’s advocate Nipun Saxena :)
Well explained
Why are Indian laws so complicated. Is that the reason why it itakes average of 6 years for a court case to finish?
Separation of the Church and the State? The present Coronation did tell us a different story.
Democracy is a useful tool like a Leash on a Dog that stays by your Feet.
You can eat whatever food you want but if you dog reaches for it, You can always hold it down by its Leash. We were always Westerners Dogs, Nothing more.
This should be simple only civil marriage that is with the state. Religion, caste or one is not an Indian a civil marriage should be legal. Why is Indian laws so complicated?
Damn, after hearing the entire complexities of SMA it seems like the law is too old and backward to accommodate same sex unions. Plus our conservative legislature’s wants the archaic law to exist and people to adhere forever without any change and without acknowledging the evolution of society.
I am an Indian citizen married to a US citizen and our marriage was registered in Chandigarh UT. All we required to register the marriage was an NOC from the US embassy and our marriage certificate doesn’t mention special marriage act. This is all too complex and confusing. Are such marriages still required to be registered under special marriage act?
Also, we were told by the Chandigarh and Panchkula municipalities that a “religious” ceremony and its pictures are REQUIRED to register the marriage. Things on ground are vastly different than the laws. A factor for this reality could be limited knowledge and incompetence at municipality level. I consulted a lawyer too and he was more interested in his fee. In short, ground reality is very different to what the laws say.
Vipul: In Special Marriage Act you have to give notice for 30 days, the notice has to appear on the office notice board. Very annoying, but it is supposed to be fair notice to dodge bigamists. So looks like what you were doing was registering a religious marriage, that is quite different. Since 99.9% of people are married in this way - religious marriage certified by government, you are good. However, during visa interview they might ask for marriage inviation card and photos. this is to prevent fraud. I am quite sure about my comment, but I have not looked into this for a long time. Cheers.
Gurudev 🙏🙏
Is there any possibility of removing the 30-day notice period under the Special Marriage Act?
Very progressive act way back in 1954 .
The Print is very DISINGENUOUS. It cleverly avoids mentioning non-HINDU personal laws and how these are kept out of scope of all civil laws. India is clearly NOT a SECULAR society and is in DIRE need of a Uniform Civil Code.
Ifoneofthe is havingproblemtobringoutthe children whaistheruleinspecialmarriageact
Whataboutoneoftbothisunsbleyobringoutth children
2:10 “marriage outside caste was frowned upon”
Bharata, who later became the King of Bhārat, was son of Dushyantha and Shakuntala. Neither of the two were born to same “caste”.
Ved Vyas, was born to Parashara and Satyavati. Satyavati was a fisherwoman and Parashara was a sage.
But alas, projecting propaganda by the Hindu fold themselves upon reading European books about Bharatiyas is kind of colonial slavery we survive in.
Exactly.
What will happen if same sex marriage partner marry with his partner father or mother, sister,our cousin
Heterosexual sexual people can also do the same but our laws are blocking it.
The laws aren't implemented properly though.
you do realise that incest is not legal for straights either? So why would it be legal for gays?
Sexuality is not a choice, but the person u are in relationship with, that is your choice.
So if you are gay or straight, be with anyone outside family, and you are ok
Unlike America's constitution, which involved 300 individuals comprising the best thinkers, scientists, philosophers, merchants, military personnel, historians, teachers, and lawmakers, our constitution was written solely by Dr. Ambedkar. There was no meaningful discussion, as it was a one-man show completed in less than three months. It's no surprise that the entire constitution requires replacement, rather than just individual laws.
I agree with you.
Finally, What kind of Judgement the SC can come out with.
A. The request is valid so parliament has to ammend the act soon
B. The request is valid so with the special powers that is given to us (Supreme court) we declare a special law for them
C. The request do bot have any merit so we reject.