The supreme court using its powers under article 145 legalize same sex marriages to a constitution bench comprising of 5 judges. The supreme court has complied all its underlying petition and the final arguments are to be held on 18 as many homosexuals are fighting for the legalization of same sex marriages so that they can avail legalized marriages like for April benefits of example, LGBTQIA+ couples cannot adopt children or have a child by surrogacy; they do not have automatic rights to inheritance, maintenance and tax benefits; after a partner passes away, they cannot avail of benefit s like pension or compensation. The government has opposed such kind of marriages and it stance on the issue is important to know what rights does the LGBTQ community has.

The government has filed affidavit in court arguing that traditionally the notion o marriage is socially, culturally f marriage was between a man and a women. The concept of and legally ingrained and hence does not need judicial interpretation to change it. Also the government fears that same sex marriages could create a havoc in society with change in traditional laws and personal laws.

The law minister Kiran Rijuju also said that marriage is a matter of policy and can be addressed by legislature and executive alone hence indirectly asking the court to stay out of the matter. However all the contention of the government are baseless and frivolous without any reasonable argument and reasoning. The statue has enacted special marriage act 1955 which says that any person can marry one another.

This statue was enacted so that people from differ ent caste can marry each other without compromising and amending their personal and traditional laws. Same goes with the reasoning here in the present case. There is no need to amend personal laws in same sex marriages and these marriages can be regulated by special marriage act itself.

There just need to be an amendment which could expressly allow same sex marriage however in the exisisting law under section 4 it says for any two person can marry one another condition that no person has an existing spouse. The statement of our law minister that it is a matter of state policy which must not be open to judicial interference assumes that no rights of any party is being violated is absured.

The right to privacy is being violated as regarded in KS PUTTASAWMY cas e which says that "Privacy includes at its core the preservation of personal intimacies, the sanctity of family life, marriage, procreation, the home and sexual orientation." The right to privacy entails the right of the citizens to make decisions about th eir family life and marriage. The state currently denies same sex couples of this right constitution being a social organism whose meaning changes with time and changing social conditions same is the notion of marriage. It must change with changing time.

Our es to has an good effect in the society . In other countries like In October 2019, samesex marriage became legal in Northern Ireland . Although Northern Island is a constituent of the United Kingdom, with its own parliament at Stormont, the change in its marriage laws ultimately came about due to action by the UK's Parliament in London. British lawmakers justified the change (which was accompanied by the legalization of abortion) because the Northern Irish parliament was suspended due to a stalemate between Northern Ireland's parties. in January 2017

Northern Ireland had been the last part of the UK where same-sex marriage was banned; England and Wales moved to allow gay and lesbian couples to wed in 2013 and Scotland followed in 2014 . The South African parliament legalized same-sex marriage in November 2006, one year after the country's highest court ruled that the previous marriage laws violated the South African constitution's guarantee of equal rights.

The new law allows for religious institutions and civil officers to refuse to conduct same-sex marriage ceremonies, a provision that critics claim violates the rights of same-sex couples under the constitution.The new measure passed by a margin of greater than five-to-one, with support coming from both the governing African National Congress as well as the main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance.

However, the traditional monarch of the Zulu people, who account for about one-fifth of the country's population, maintains that homosexuality is morally wrong. According to a study by UNICEF, there are 29.6 million orphaned and abandoned children in India which is a country with a disconcertingly low adoption rate.

However, the willing samesex couples are still deprived of their adoption rights in the country. once the same sex marriages are legalised it would increase the adoption and would give the children a new life and good education which would further help the country increasing the GDP.

Also it was assumed that after Navtej Singh Johar vs UOI i.e decriminalisation of homosexuality the government would automatically make rules regarding rights of LGBTQ community and would allow same sex marriages thus making India not a rigid but a liberal society respecting peoples opinion and their right to live according to the way they want. The government must rethink their stance and give validity to same sex marriages establishing the rights enshrined in the constitution and help achive a sane and undivided united society.