AliciaPaschall: put up a entry

2026-05-05T18:32:19Z

put up a entry

New page

{{Short description|none}} 
{{SSM|minimal}}

[[Gujarat]] does not recognise [[same-sex marriage]]s or [[civil union]]s. However, [[Cohabitation|live-in relationships]] are not unlawful in Gujarat. The [[Supreme Court of India|Indian Supreme Court]] has held that adults have a constitutional right to live together without being married, and that police cannot interfere with consenting adults living together. The [[Gujarat High Court]] upheld this constitutional right in ''Sarvaiya Rajubhai Bachubhai v. State Of Gujarat'' in April 2024. In addition, in June 2020 it recognised a ''[[Maitri karar|maitri karār]]'' between a same-sex couple.

==Legal history==
===Background===
[[Marriage]] in [[India]] is governed under several federal laws. These laws allow for the solemnisation of marriages according to different religions, notably Hinduism, [[Christianity in Gujarat|Christianity]], and Islam. Every citizen has the right to choose which law will apply to them based on their community or religion. These laws are the ''[[Hindu Marriage Act, 1955]]'',<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bokakhat.gov.in/pdf/The_hindu_marriage_act.pdf|title=Hindu Marriage Act, 1955|work=bokakhat|accessdate=September 5, 2022}}</ref> which governs matters of marriage, separation and divorce for Hindus, [[Jainism in Gujarat|Jains]], Buddhists and Sikhs, the ''[[The Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872|Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872]]'',<ref>{{cite web |title=The Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 |url=https://lawyerslaw.org/the-indian-christian-marriage-act-1872/ |website=lawyerslaw.org |access-date=4 June 2018}}</ref> and the ''[[Muslim personal law in India|Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937]]''.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1937-26.pdf|title= Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937|accessdate=September 6, 2022|work=legislative.gov.in}}</ref> In addition, the ''Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936'' and the ''Anand Marriage Act, 1909'' regulate the marriages of Parsis and Sikhs.<ref>{{cite web|url= https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2476/1/a1936_____3.pdf|title=Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936|work=www.indiacode.nic.in|accessdate=September 6, 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1909-07.pdf|title=Anand Marriage Act, 1909|work=legislative.gov.in|accessdate=September 6, 2022}}</ref> The ''[[Special Marriage Act, 1954]]'' (SMA) allows all Indian citizens to marry regardless of the religion of either party.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://sandesh.com/supplement/hindu-marriage-act-conditions-ceremonies-and-registration|language=gu|title=હિંદુ લગ્ન અધિનિયમ-શરતો, વિધિઓ અને નોંધણી|work=Sandesh|first=Ami|last=Yagnik|date=2 December 2022}}</ref> Marriage officers appointed by the government may solemnize and register marriages contracted under the SMA, which are registered with the state as a civil contract. The act is particularly popular among [[Interfaith marriage|interfaith couples]], [[Inter-caste marriage|inter-caste couples]], and spouses with [[Atheism|no religious beliefs]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1954-43_1.pdf|title=The Special Marriage Act, 1954|work=legislative.gov|accessdate=September 5, 2022}}</ref> None of these acts explicitly bans [[same-sex marriage]].

On 14 February 2006, the [[Supreme Court of India]] ruled in ''Smt. Seema v. Ashwani Kumar'' that the [[States and union territories of India|states and union territories]] are obliged to register all marriages performed under the federal laws. The court's ruling was expected to reduce instances of [[child marriage]]s, [[bigamy]], cases of [[domestic violence]] and unlawful abandonment.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://legal-wires.com/case-study/case-study-smt-seema-v-ashwin-kumar-case/|title= Case Study: Smt Seema v. Ashwin Kumar|date=21 October 2022|work=Legal Wires}}</ref> Subsequently, [[List of governors of Gujarat|Governor]] [[Nawal Kishore Sharma]] signed the ''Gujarat Registration of Marriages Act, 2006'' into law in March 2006. The act provides for the registration of all marriages solemnized in Gujarat irrespective of the religion, caste or creed of the parties. It created local registrars of marriages, which shall issue [[Marriage license|marriage certificates]] upon reception of memorandums of marriage filed by the spouses. The registrar may refuse to issue the license if the parties fail to meet the requirements to marry under the national law of their religion or community. It does not explicitly ban same-sex marriages, and defines marriage simply as including remarriage. However, the act generally refers to married spouses as "bride" and "bridegroom".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/4449/1/registrationofmarriagesact.pdf|title=Gujarat Registration of Marriages Act, 2006|work=indiacode.nic.in|accessdate=8 October 2023}}</ref>

Most marriages ({{langx|gu|લગ્ન}}, {{transliteration|kn|lagna}}, {{IPA|kn|ˈləɡnə|pron}}; {{langx|hi|विवाह}}, {{transliteration|hi|vivāh}}; {{langx|sd|شادي}}, {{transliteration|sd|śādī}}; {{langx|bhb|वीवा}}, {{transliteration|bhb|vīvā}}) in Gujarat are [[Arranged marriage in the Indian subcontinent|arranged]]. Arranged marriage remains the prevailing norm across India, accounting for the vast majority of unions, and often placing pressure on LGBT individuals to marry partners of the opposite sex. Nevertheless, some same-sex couples have participated in traditional marriage ceremonies, although the marriages lack legal status in Gujarat. In 2004, an interfaith same-sex couple were married in [[Vadodara]] according to both Hindu and Muslim traditions. An LGBT charity, Lakshya Trust, stated at the time: "In four years, we have facilitated at least 15 gay marriages. Gay marriages are a boon as the group is already at a high risk of contradicting [[HIV/AIDS]]. The marriages will promote single-partner sex, which will help the HIV prevention campaign." Activists said they hoped the marriage would "send a message to society that they [LGBT people] have equal rights".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/830976.cms|title=Gay marriages groom anti-Aids battle|date=28 August 2004|work=The Times of India}}</ref> Several same-sex couples have entered into so-called "friendship agreements" ({{lang|gu|મૈત્રી કરાર}},<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.sardargurjari.com/visitor/DetailView.aspx?NewsId=128892|title=કઠલાલના કલેસરના શિક્ષકે બે-બે પત્ની કરી છતાં મન ન ભરાતાં અન્ય યુવતી સાથે મૈત્રી કરાર કર્યો|language=gu|date=22 April 2024|work=Sardar Gurjari}}</ref> ''[[Maitri karar|maitri karār]]'', {{IPA|gu|ˈməjtɾi ˈkəɾɑɾ|pron}}) to legitimise their relationships. A {{transliteration|gu|maitri karār}} is a written document, often registered and notarized, which contains the terms and conditions on which a couple agrees to enter into cohabitation. Traditionally, a {{transliteration|gu|maitri karār}} was most commonly a contract between a married man and his unmarried mistress, used to circumvent the provisions of the ''Hindu Marriage Act'' which prohibits bigamy.<ref>{{cite news|title=Love pacts: Just good friends|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/living/story/19811215-no-cumbersome-divorce-proceedings-people-of-ahmedabad-opt-for-maitri-karar-contract-773519-2013-10-24|access-date=24 August 2017|agency=India Today|date=15 December 1981}}</ref> The first {{transliteration|gu|maitri karār}} between a same-sex couple occurred in 1987 in the [[Chhota Udaipur district]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://lifestyle.livemint.com/news/talking-point/same-sex-couples-in-india-are-using-a-gujarati-practice-to-get-married-111601876888126.html|title=Same-sex couples in India are using a Gujarati practice to get 'married'|website=lifestyle.livemint.com|date=5 October 2020|author=Omkar Khandekar}}</ref> A famous Gujarati resident to have entered into a same-sex marriage is Prince [[Manvendra Singh Gohil]], probable heir of the honorary [[Maharaja]] of [[Rajpipla]], who married his American partner Cecil "DeAndre" Richardson (''né'' Hilton) in [[Seattle]] in July 2013.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/trends/lifestyle/manvendra-singh-gohil-many-indian-families-priests-have-accepted-same-sex-marriages-10308821.html|title=Manvendra Singh Gohil: 'Many Indian families, priests have accepted same-sex marriages'|work=www.moneycontrol.com|date=25 March 2023}}</ref>

===Live-in relationships===
{{Infobox subdivision type
|name=[[Recognition of same-sex unions in India]]
|map={{Same-sex marriage in India|width=300}}
}}

[[Cohabitation|Live-in relationships]] ({{langx|gu|સહવાસ સંબંધ}},<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gujaratijagran.com/opinion/truth-of-the-freedom-of-live-in-relationships-the-law-does-not-recognize-live-in-relationships-as-marriages-153728|title=લિવ-ઈન રિલેશનશિપની સ્વતંત્રતાનું સત્ય, કાયદો લિવ-ઈન રિલેશનશિપને લગ્ન તરીકે માન્યતા આપતો નથી.|language=gu|date=27 June 2023|work=Gujarati Jagran|first=Hariom|last=Sharma}}</ref> {{transliteration|gu|sahvās sambandh}}, {{IPA|gu|ˈsəɦʋɑs ˈsəmbə̃ndʱ|pron}}, or {{lang|gu|લિવ-ઇન રિલેશનશિપ}},<ref>{{cite web|url=https://tv9gujarati.com/photo-gallery/live-in-relationships-in-india-legal-status-rights-1175528.html|title=Live in relationship : શું તમે લિવ-ઈન રિલેશનશિપમાં રહો છો ? જાણો તેની કાનુની માન્યતા શું હોય|language=gu|date=2 February 2025|first=Meera|last=Kansagara|work=TV9 Gujarati}}</ref> {{transliteration|gu|liva-ina rileśanaśipa}}; {{langx|hi|सहवास संबंध}},<ref>{{cite web|url=https://hindi.news18.com/blogs/rekha-garg/live-in-relationship-consider-an-insecure-cohabitation-4943389.html|language=hi|work=Hindi News18|title=Live in Relationship: असुरक्षित सहजीवन पर विचार करें|first=Rekha|last=Garg}}</ref> {{transliteration|hi|sahvās sambandh}}; {{langx|sd|گڏ رهڻ وارو رشتو}}, {{transliteration|sd|gaḍ rahṇ wāro rishto}}) are not illegal in Gujarat. The Indian Supreme Court has held that adults have a constitutional right to live together without being married, that police cannot interfere with consenting adults living together, and that live-in relationships are not unlawful. State courts have sometimes upheld this constitutional right, and further ruled that if a couple faces threats from family or the community they may request police protection. However, live-in relationships do not confer all the legal rights and benefits of marriage.

In June 2020, a lesbian couple from the [[Mahisagar district]] filed a petition with the [[Gujarat High Court]] seeking police protection from their families and recognition of their right to cohabitation. The couple had entered into a {{transliteration|gu|maitri karār}} as a way to legitimise their relationship; "like in case of a marital union, it had details on property ownership, inheritance and maintenance, in case of separation." The High Court granted their petition on 23 July 2020 and ordered the police to protect the couple.<ref name="maitri">{{cite web|url=https://www.iamgujarat.com/gujarat/ahmedabad/court-comes-to-rescue-of-gujarat-polices-first-lesbian-couple/articleshow/77302619.cms|title=ગુજરાત પોલીસના 'પ્રથમ' લેસ્બિયન કપલની મદદે આવી ગુજરાત હાઈકોર્ટ|website=Gujarati News|date=1 August 2020|language=gu}}</ref> Maya Sharma, an activist with the Vikalp Women's Group, said "such contracts in court cases [are used] in which one of the partners' parents were forcing marriage upon them. It has helped us get judgements in our favour." The High Court ruled similarly in April 2024 when it upheld a ''[[habeas corpus]]'' petition filed by a woman's same-sex partner, after she had been allegedly taken away by her husband and confined to her home.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/gujarat-high-court/gujarat-high-court-stray-bulls-pil-dwarka-312597|title=Major Woman Free To Choose Her Own Course: Gujarat High Court On Live-In Partner's Habeas Corpus Plea|first=Bhavya|last=Singh|work=LiveLaw|date=22 April 2024}}</ref> In ''Sarvaiya Rajubhai Bachubhai v. State Of Gujarat'', the court ruled that the woman had the right to live with her live-in partner and ordered police protection. "Since high court was in the ''habeas corpus'' jurisdiction, it just followed the wish of the ''corpus'' (plea) and allowed her to go with the petitioner [''[[sic]]'']", said the partner's lawyer.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/man-separates-wife-from-live-in-partner-high-court-reunites-them/articleshow/109444118.cms|title=Gujarat man separates wife from her live-in partner, HC reunites them|work=The Times of India|date=20 April 2024}}</ref> However, the Gujarat High Court has also dismissed similar ''habeas corpus'' petitions, generally when one of the live-in partners is already married to a third party. In ''Bhagwan Rajabhai Chaudhari v. State of Gujarat'',<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/640bcec1b9c46b56ccb103e3|title=Bhagwan Rajabhai Chaudhari v. State of Gujarat|work=Casmine|date=6 March 2023}}</ref> Judges [[Vipul Pancholi]] and Hemant Prachchhak ruled that a live-in partner could not seek custody of a woman who was legally married to someone else. The court held in March 2023 that since the woman's lawful marriage was not dissolved, her husband's custody could not be treated as "illegal custody", even if the woman and her live-in partner were cohabiting. The court also imposed a cost of [[Indian rupee|₹]]5,000 on the petitioner.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/high-courts/live-in-partner-plea-dismissed-custody-of-married-woman-gujarat-1468560|title=Gujarat HC Imposes Cost On Live-In Partner Who Filed Plea To Get Custody Of Woman Married To Another Man|first=Swasti|last=Chaturvedi|date=24 March 2023|work=Verdictum}}</ref> In addition, in a separate case involving an opposite-sex interfaith couple in October 2023, the High Court described live-in relationships as "timepass" and mere "infatuation".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.outlookindia.com/national/gujarat-high-court-terms-live-in-relationships-timepass-and-infatuation-denies-interfaith-couple-plea-for-protection-news-326309|title=Gujarat High Court Terms Live-In Relationships 'Timepass' And 'Infatuation', Denies Interfaith Couple's Plea For Protection|work=Outlook India|date=23 October 2023}}</ref>

===Transgender and intersex issues===
Like most of [[South Asia]], Gujarat recognizes a traditional [[third gender]] community known as ''[[Hijra (South Asia)|hijra]]'' ({{lang|gu|પાવૈયા}}, {{transliteration|hi|pāvaiyā}}, or {{lang|gu|હીજડો}}, {{transliteration|gu|hījṛo}}), historically holding respected community roles, and known for their distinct culture, communities led by [[gurus]], and traditional roles as performers. Media outlets have reported that the local [[Kutchi people|Kutchi]] culture in [[Anjar, Gujarat|Anjar]] celebrates ritualistic [[transgender]] marriages every year during the festival of [[Holi]], a custom that has been followed for over 150 years.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://bnwjournal.com/2022/07/01/common-law-marriages-a-ray-of-hope-for-lgbtq-couples/|title=Common Law Marriages: A Ray of Hope for LGBTQ Couples|first=Himanshu|last=Verma|date=1 July 2022|work=BNW Journal}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=Same-sex marriage in India: Socio-legal aspects|url=https://www.lawjournal.info/article/66/3-1-10-777.pdf|journal=International Journal of Law, Justice and Jurisprudence|date=2023|volume=3|issue=1|page=24-31|first1=Nirmala|last1=Devi|first2=Supreet|last2=Kaur}}</ref> The Supreme Court's 2023 ruling in ''[[Supriyo v. Union of India]]'' held that the [[Constitution of India|Indian Constitution]] does not require the legalisation of same-sex marriages but affirmed that transgender people may marry opposite-sex partners.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://articles.manupatra.com/article-details/Legal-Progression-Social-Implications-Case-Comment-on-Supriyo-Chakraborty-Anr-v-Union-Of-India|title="Legal Progression & Social Implications Case Comment on Supriyo Chakraborty & Anr v. Union Of India"|work=Manupatra|date=27 May 2024|first1=Rajeev Pratap|last1=Singh Bhutyal|first2=Swasti|last2=Arya}}</ref>

==See also==
*[[LGBT rights in India]]
*[[Recognition of same-sex unions in India]]
*''[[Supriyo v. Union of India]]''

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{LGBT in India}}

[[Category:Recognition of same-sex unions in India by state|Gujarat]]
[[Category:Politics of Gujarat]]

Recognition of same-sex unions in Gujarat - Revision history

AliciaPaschall: put up a entry