Ajithkumardas6: created a details.

2026-05-05T20:50:31Z

created a details.

New page

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

[[Maharashtra]] does not recognise [[same-sex marriage]]s or [[civil union]]s. However, [[Cohabitation|live-in relationships]] are not unlawful in Maharashtra. 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 [[Bombay High Court]] upheld this constitutional right in July 2023. In August 2025, a same-sex couple filed a [[writ]] petition with the High Court, arguing that tax provisions resulted in unequal economic treatment for same-sex couples and sought inclusion under the term "spouse" for tax benefits under the ''[[Income-tax Act, 2025|Income Tax Act]]''.

==Legal history==
===Background===
[[Marriage]] in [[India]] is governed under several federal laws. These laws allow for the solemnisation of marriages according to different [[Religion in Maharashtra|religions]], notably [[Hinduism in Maharashtra|Hinduism]], [[Christianity in Maharashtra|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|access-date=September 5, 2022}}</ref> which governs matters of marriage, separation and divorce for Hindus, [[Jainism in Maharashtra|Jains]], [[Marathi Buddhists|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|access-date=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|access-date=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|access-date=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://news18marathi.com/national/adults-aged-18-and-above-can-legally-choose-to-live-together-even-if-they-have-not-reached-the-marriageable-age-rajasthan-high-court-has-ruled-1551279.html|language=mr|title=वय 18+ असल्यास विवाहाशिवाय एकत्र राहता येणार; Live-in Relationshipवर हाय कोर्टाचा ऐतिहासिक निर्णय|work=News18|first=Jaykrishna|last=Nair|date=5 December 2025}}</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|access-date=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> Maharashtra had already passed a law requiring the registration of all marriages. In April 1999, [[List of governors of Maharashtra|Governor]] [[P. C. Alexander]] signed the ''Maharashtra Regulation of Marriage Bureaus and Registration of Marriages Act, 1998'' into law. 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. The act provides for the registration of all marriages solemnized in the state irrespective of the religion, caste or creed of the parties. It does not explicitly ban same-sex marriages, and defines marriage simply as including remarriage. However, the act generally refers to married spouses as "husband and wife"; it defines the "parties" to a marriage as "the husband and wife whose marriage has been solemnized".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/15764/1/the_maharashtra_regulation_of_marriage_bureaus_and_registration_of_marriages_act%2C_1998.pdf|title=Maharashtra Regulation of Marriage Bureaus and Registration of Marriages Act, 1998|work=India Code|access-date=14 October 2023}}</ref>

Most marriages ({{langx|mr|विवाह}}, {{transliteration|mr|vivāh}}, {{IPA|mr|ˈʋiʋaːɦ|pron}}; {{langx|hi|विवाह}}, {{transliteration|hi|vivāh}}; {{langx|bhb|वीवा}},<ref>{{cite web|url=https://dn790009.ca.archive.org/0/items/rudimentsofbhili00thomrich/rudimentsofbhili00thomrich.pdf|title=Rudiments of the Bhili language|access-date=5 May 2026|date=1895|publisher=United Printing Press}}</ref> {{transliteration|bhb|vīvā}}; {{langx|gon|मरमीं}},<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gondwana.in/en/gondi-dictionary|title=Gondi Dictionary|work=gondwana.in|access-date=5 May 2026}}</ref> {{transliteration|gon|maramīṁ}}; {{langx|kfq|ब्याव}},<ref>{{cite book|title=Korku Language: Grammar, Texts and Vocabulary|publisher=Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa|date=1999|first=K S|last=Nagaraja}}</ref> {{transliteration|kfq|byāw}}; {{langx|nll|वररि}},<ref>{{cite book|title=The Nihali Language (Grammar, Texts And Vocabulary)|date=2014|first=K S|last=Nagaraja|isbn=9788173431449|publisher=Central Institute of Indian Languages}}</ref> {{transliteration|nll|warari}}) in Maharashtra are [[Arranged marriage in the Indian subcontinent|arranged]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://lagnavaarta.com/blog/honoring-tradition-embracing-change-navigating-cultural-expectations-in-maharashtrian-arranged-marriages|title=Honoring Tradition, Embracing Change: Navigating Cultural Expectations in Maharashtrian Arranged Marriages|work=Lagna Vaarta|access-date=5 May 2026}}</ref> 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 these unions lack legal recognition in Maharashtra. In December 2017, a same-sex couple, 43-year-old [[IIT Bombay]] engineer Hrishi Sathawane and his 35-year-old partner of [[Vietnam]]ese origin known only as Vinh, were married in a traditional Hindu ceremony in [[Yavatmal]]. The ceremony, which was attended by close friends and family members, involved an exchange of rings and garlands in accordance with Hindu custom.<ref name="yavatmal">[https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/us-based-iit-grad-marries-gay-partner-in-maharashtra/articleshow/62481141.cms US-based IIT grad marries gay partner in Maharashtra] ''The Times of India'', 13 January 2018</ref> In February 2019, two men, Vinodh Philip and Vincent Illaire, held a traditional marriage ceremony in [[Mumbai]] with the exchange of garlands and the wearing of a [[mangala sutra]] and toe rings as symbols of marriage.<ref name="mumbai">{{cite web|url=https://www.thepinknews.com/2019/02/10/gay-couple-first-same-sex-wedding-party-mumbai/|title=Gay couple holds the first same-sex wedding party in Mumbai|work=PinkNews|date=10 February 2019|first=Josh|last=Jackman}}</ref> In 2022, a lesbian couple, Dr. Paromita Mukherjee and Dr. Surabhi Mitra, were engaged in a private ceremony in [[Nagpur]], though chose to have "big, fat, sea-side destination wedding" in [[Goa]]. The couple went public with the news of their wedding.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.travelandleisureindia.in/people/interview-with-lesbian-doctor-couple-paromita-and-surabhi-mitra/|title=TravelIsLove: Lesbian Partners Paromita And Surabhi Reveal Their Grand Goa Wedding Plans|work=Travel and Leisure|first=Srushti|last=Kulkarni|date=16 February 2022}}</ref> Mukherjee said, "We are over the moon with the love we are garnering. Somewhere we knew that the society and its aware people will celebrate our love with us."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.timesnownews.com/mirror-now/in-focus/article/exclusive-a-glimpse-into-lesbian-couple-paromita-mukherjee-and-surbhi-mitras-heartwarming-love-story/849049|title=[EXCLUSIVE] A glimpse into lesbian couple Paromita Mukherjee and Surabhi Mitra's heartwarming love story|work=Times Now News|first=Shreya|last=Tinkhede|date=13 January 2022}}</ref> Nevertheless, many gays and lesbians continue to marry partners of the opposite sex due to societal and family pressure. A 2009 report by the [[Humsafar Trust]] estimated that 70% of gay men in Mumbai and 80% in smaller cities across Maharashtra were married to women.<ref>{{cite web|title=Survey Suggests Some Gay Men in Heterosexual Marriages Are Considering Coming Out, Post‑377|url=https://www.theswaddle.com/survey-suggests-some-gay-men-in-heterosexual-marriages-are-considering-coming-out-post-377|work=The Swaddle|date=22 October 2018|first=Anubhuti|last=Matta}}</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|mr|सहवास संबंध}},<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.loksatta.com/chaturang/live-in-relation-350696/|language=mr|title=सहजीवनाचा अर्थ|work=Loksatta|date=18 January 2014}}</ref> {{transliteration|mr|sahvāsa sambandha}}, {{IPA|mr|ˈsəɦʋaːsə ˈsəmbəndʱə|pron}}, or {{lang|mr|लिव्ह-इन रिलेशन}},<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.lokmat.com/satara/live-means-a713/|title=लिव्ह-इन म्हणजे...|work=Lokmat|language=mr|date=18 July 2021}}</ref> {{transliteration|mr|livha-ina rileśana}}; {{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}}) are not illegal in Maharashtra. 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 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 July 2023, the [[Bombay High Court]] ruled that same-sex live-in relationships are not unlawful. Judges [[Revati Mohite Dere]] and Gauri Godse ordered the police to provide security to two women who had chosen to live together against the wishes of one of their parents.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/mumbai-news/bombay-hc-directs-police-to-provide-security-to-same-sex-couple-against-family-opposition-implements-draft-guidelines-101688586688762.html|title=HC grant police cover to same-sex couple|work=Hindustan Times|date=6 July 2023|first=K A Y|last=Dodhiya}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://punemirror.com/pune-mirror-explore/bombay-high-court-orders-police-protection-for-a-same-sex-couple-in-pune/|title=Bombay High Court orders police protection for a same-sex couple in Pune|date=6 July 2023|work=Pune Mirror}}</ref> Same-sex couples remain in a legal grey zone. While they may live together and seek police protection if necessary, they lack many of the rights, obligations, responsibilities and security of marriage.

In August 2025, a same-sex couple, Payio Ashiho and Vivek Divan, filed a [[writ]] petition, arguing that tax provisions resulted in unequal economic treatment for same-sex couples and sought inclusion under the term "spouse" for tax benefits under the ''[[Income-tax Act, 2025|Income Tax Act]]''. In November 2025, the Bombay High Court refused interim relief in ''Payio Ashiho v. Union of India''. The federal [[Income Tax Department]] argued that their relationship could not be recognised as a "marriage" under the ''Income Tax Act'' as "it was not similarly recognised under any marriage law in India". Further proceedings were held on 10 December 2025.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/law-news/story/bombay-high-court-refuses-same-sex-couple-marriage-not-recognised-income-tax-2818918-2025-11-13|title=Court denies tax benefits to same-sex couple as govt says marriage not recognised|work=India Today|date=13 November 2025|location=Mumbai|first=Akshat|last=Trivedi}}</ref>

===Transgender and intersex issues===
Like most of [[South Asia]], Maharashtra recognizes a traditional [[third gender]] community known as ''[[Hijra (South Asia)|hijra]]'' ({{lang|mr|हिजडा}}, {{transliteration|mr|hijḍā}}), historically holding respected community roles, and known for their distinct culture, communities led by [[gurus]], and traditional roles as performers. There are terms for [[eunuch]]s or [[transgender]] individuals in the languages of some [[Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes|Scheduled Tribes]] of Maharashtra, namely {{transliteration|gon|āḍigunllōḍ}} ({{lang|gon|आडिगुंल्‍लोड}}) in [[Gondi language|Gondi]]; however, this does not in itself demonstrate that a third gender category existed in their cultures or that there were ritual or kinship roles for such individuals. 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> Following the Supreme Court's ruling in ''Supriyo'', five transgender women married their male partners in [[Pimpri-Chinchwad]] in January 2025 under the ''Hindu Marriage Act''.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/five-transgender-women-marry-their-partners-at-community-wedding-event-in-pimpri-chinchwad/articleshow/117652197.cms|title=Five transgender women marry their partners at community wedding in Pimpri Chinchwad|work=The Times of India|date=29 January 2025|first=Alim|last=Shaikh}}</ref> Some couples had already married prior to the court ruling. Madhuri Sarode, a transgender woman, and Jay Kumar Sharma were married in a Hindu temple in Mumbai in December 2016 in one of the first transgender marriages in India "that was [not] held in secret".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/mumbai/other/first-open-transgender-wedding-in-mumbai/amp_articleshow/56253864.html|title=First open transgender wedding in Mumbai|work=Mumbai Mirror|date=30 December 2016}}</ref> Another couple, Mahant Shivlakshmi and Sanjay Jhalte, were married in [[Nashik]] in 2021.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.thequint.com/gender/love-dont-judge-meet-trans-woman-man-couple-who-tied-the-knot|work=The Quint|date=24 June 2021|title=How Trans Woman Found Love, And Her Life Partner, on TikTok|first=Ram|last=Girase}}</ref>

==Religious performance==
Several same-sex couples have married in Hindu temples in Maharashtra. Family and community reactions have ranged from support to disapproval to violent persecution.<ref name="yavatmal"/><ref name="mumbai"/> In 2010, academic [[Ruth Vanita]] reported that many of these couples were "non-English-speaking young women from lower-income groups", and "[not] connected to any movement for equality; most of them were not aware of terms like "gay" or "lesbian". Many of them framed their desire to marry in terms drawn from traditional understandings of love and marriage, saying, for example, that they could not conceive of life without each other, and wanted to live and die together."<ref>{{cite journal|title=Same-Sex Weddings, Hindu Traditions, and Modern India|first=Ruth|last=Vanita|journal=Duke University Press|date=2010|volume=25|issue=4|pages=43–45}}</ref> The [[Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Bombay|Catholic Church]] opposes same-sex marriage and does not allow its priests to officiate at such marriages. In December 2023, the [[Holy See]] published ''[[Fiducia supplicans]]'', a declaration allowing [[Priesthood in the Catholic Church|Catholic priests]] to [[Blessing in the Catholic Church|bless]] couples who are not considered to be [[Marriage in the Catholic Church|married according to church teaching]], including the [[Blessing of same-sex unions in Christian churches|blessing of same-sex couples]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Flynn |first=JD |date=2023-12-22 |title=Is the 'false narrative' narrative a false narrative? |url=https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-the-false-narrative-narrative |access-date=2023-12-23 |website=[[The Pillar]] |language=en|archive-date=23 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231223121603/https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-the-false-narrative-narrative |url-status=live }}</ref> Archbishop [[Oswald Gracias]] responded to the declaration by calling it "an affirmation of our spirituality and a gift". Gracias said, "Our Indian mentality is so inclusive, understanding people of other religions and other faiths. All are searching for God, all are searching for the truth, all are searching for spirituality."<ref name="catholicblessings">{{cite web|url=https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/fiducia-supplicans-whos-saying-what|title='Fiducia supplicans': Who's saying what?|work=The Pillar|first=Luke|last=Coppen|date=19 December 2023}}</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|Maharashtra]]
[[Category:Politics of Maharashtra]]

Recognition of same-sex unions in Maharashtra - Revision history

Ajithkumardas6: created a details.