‘We were expecting the verdict to be on our side’: Disappointment, resignation among LGBTQ community after SC ruling

Aadi, who is the founder of the Ramjas queer collective, was among those sitting outside the court, eagerly waiting for the five-judge bench’s judgment. “This is regressive… I don’t have words to express how I feel right now… we were expecting the verdict to be on our side, we need to stop looking down on homosexuality,” he cried.

Amrita Tripathi, the partner of petitioner Rituparna Borah, was attentively listening to the judgment with her headphones on. “I am very disappointed; there is some progress but I don’t think it’s enough… Apart from marriage rights, there were other things in this petition like adoption rights and the right to have a chosen family, but queer couples should also have the right to marry the person of their choice,” she said.

Some sat in huddles, others anxiously paced about the lawns, and all had phones raised to their ears intently listening to the live stream of the Supreme Court’s proceedings. (Express Photo by Tashi Tobgyal)

Tripathi also expressed her disappointment in the verdict not getting passed due to the lack of one vote: “The CJI and Justice (Sanjay Kishan) Kaul had come up with some great advice but it always boils down to one vote.”

Some of the petitioners were also present on the court premises. Krishanu Srihar, who was amongst the petitioners of the Rituparna Borah vs Union of India petition, said, “I am still trying to understand what the judgment means, the pronouncements are unclear.”

The Rituparna Borah petition was filed by a group of four queer feminist activists and three queer couples, demanding that the court acknowledge families of choice. The petition talks also about familial violence that queer individuals have to go through.

Suhail Abbasi, co-founder of Humsafar Trust and chairperson of the Integrated Network for Sexual Minorities (INFOSEM), said it was time to go back to the drawing board and re-strategise.

INFOSEM, a coalition of 110 community organisations, was also a petitioner for equality in marriage rights. Said Abbasi, “We will keep at our fight, we’ll continue, we’ll strategise… we’ll have to do stronger advocacy with the parliamentarians somewhere down the line.”

Petitioner Aditi Anand also expressed her disappointment and said: “The petition (Aditi Anand ANR vs. the UOI) had demanded the right to be included in the Special Marriage Act and the right to marry… The judgment was disappointing, but we have only reached this far due to the judgment five years ago and we recognise constitutional and legal challenges,” they said.

However, for some, not all hope was lost. “Personally I feel grateful to the generations before us, the lawyers and activists who have gone through so much to achieve basic rights for us,” said Jayne, from the youth wing of the Humsafar Trust. “I agree to a certain degree, that the Supreme Court can’t make laws. This is a part of the process and it is not a full stop but a comma,” they said.

Others expressed their anger at the verdict. Ankur, a Master’s student from JNU, said, “They’ve put the ball in the legislation’s court but how can you expect us to beg the state for our rights when the state has vehemently made a case against it in court?”

“… the five judges together have not given us anything more than what we already had… The State, at present — at least from where I stand — is not listening to the voices of people like us…,” said petitioner Chayanika Shah, a member of the National Network of LBI Women and Trans Persons.