simple hit counter

Delhi HC hears requests to live stream proceedings on December 6 – The New Indian Express

Through PTI

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court said on Wednesday it will hear a plea on Dec. 6 from LGBTQ couples seeking live streaming of proceedings on a series of petitions for same-sex marriage recognition under various laws.

The court adjourned hearing the case today due to time constraints.

The petitioners’ lawyer urged the court to hear the matter soon and asked for a shorter hearing.

However, a bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad said: “It is almost 5pm. The hearing postponed to December 6th (shorter date) is not possible, we are overcrowded.”

Attorney Maneka Guruswamy, who represented some of the petitioners, said there was a request to live-stream the proceedings and the pleadings were complete, and that the request would be directed to an early hearing as both sides recognize the importance of the issue.

The center has defied the plea for live streaming, saying that broadcasting these proceedings live may not be advisable as it can create sharp ideological divisions.

The center said there had been instances in the recent past where even in matters that were not fully “live-streamed”, “serious civil unrest” was caused and “wild and unnecessary” allegations were made against sitting judges at the Supreme Court.

“It is well known that judges cannot really defend themselves in public forums and their views/opinions are expressed in court rulings,” the center said in its new affidavit filed Aug. 20.

The Supreme Court had previously expressed displeasure at the center’s filing of an affidavit opposing the live-streaming plea because it contained certain allegedly offensive words.

In the new affidavit, the center said trials like the present one are likely to be extremely charged and involve impassioned arguments from both sides, and certain arguments/comments from counsel or the judiciary are likely to provoke harsh and unwelcome reactions.

Such reactions can either be expressed in social media or even flow from virtual media into the real life of the people involved. There is also a chance that such live streaming will be edited/morphed and lose all of its sanctity.

“In order to preserve the solemnity, dignity and seriousness of court proceedings, particularly in cases such as the present where sharp ideological divisions may exist, it may be advisable not to televise the proceedings live,” it said.

The Center moved that the application be dismissed, arguing that live streaming could only be allowed after a comprehensive framework of rules, including data protection, had been drawn up.

The affidavit, filed by Central Government Permanent Counsel Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, said the live streaming of proceedings will be conducted in accordance with the “Model Rules for Live Streaming” which are being drafted under the guidance of the E-Committee of the Supreme Court, and the rules have been forwarded to the Computer Committees of various High Courts for feedback and suggestions.

“There is already a very robust system of media coverage in place and the matter at hand is certainly one that is likely to attract significant attention from newspapers and other media,” it said.

It went on to say that the motion was more in the nature of an instruction for the Delhi High Court to implement the Draft Media Rules, which is still being reviewed by that court.

The Supreme Court has heard a number of petitions filed by several same-sex couples seeking a declaration recognizing their marriages under the Special Marriage Act, the Hindu Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act.

A total of eight petitions have been submitted to the Supreme Court on this subject.

The request for live streaming of the proceedings was filed in Abhijit Iyer Mitra’s pending petition by Akhilesh Godi, Prasad Raj Dandekar and Shripad Ranade, residents of Karnataka and Mumbai.

It sought instructions to the High Court Clerk to make arrangements to live stream the final arguments of this case via YouTube or another platform.

Mitra and three others claimed that despite the Supreme Court decriminalizing consensual homosexual acts, marriages between same-sex couples are not possible, and therefore called for a declaration recognizing such marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act.

Another objection was raised by two women who wished to marry under the Special Marriage Act and questioned the provisions of the Act where same-sex marriages are not permitted.

The other was filed by two men who had married in the United States but were refused registration of the marriage under the Foreign Marriage Act.

The center has spoken out against same-sex marriage, saying marriage in India is not just a union of two people, but an institution between a biological man and a biological woman, and judicial interference would “make utter chaos with the delicate balance of personal laws.” ” cause.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published.