Krishna57edits at 08:00, 5 May 2026

2026-05-05T08:00:27Z

New page

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

[[Odisha]] does not recognise [[same-sex marriage]]s or [[civil union]]s. However, [[Cohabitation|live-in relationships]] are not unlawful in Odisha. 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 [[Orissa High Court]] upheld this constitutional right in ''[[Chinmayee Jena v. State of Odisha]]'' in August 2020. Citing Supreme Court precedent, the High Court held that same-sex live-in relationships are permissible under equality rights guaranteed by [[Article 21 of the Constitution of India|Article 21 of the Constitution]]. Further, it ruled that women in live-in relationships are protected from [[domestic violence]].

==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 in Odisha|Hinduism]], [[Christianity in Odisha|Christianity]], and [[Odia Muslims|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, 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://voiceofvictims.co.in/divorce-provision-in-hindu-marriage-act/|title=ହିନ୍ଦୁ ବିବାହ ଆଇନରେ ଛାଡ଼ପତ୍ର ବ୍ୟବସ୍ଥା|work=Voice of Victims|date=13 February 2024|language=or}}</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]], [[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> Unlike other states and union territories, Odisha has not passed a uniform compulsory marriage registration law. Instead, it has enacted religion-specific registration rules, including the ''Orissa Hindu Marriages Registration Rules, 1960'' and the ''Orissa Muhammedan Marriages & Divorces Registration Rules, 1976'', both of which were amended in 2006 to bring their wording into line with the Supreme Court ruling.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://rsdebate.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/669518/1/IQ_241_25112016_U1231_p238_p244.pdf|title=Central law for compulsory registration of marriages|access-date=19 December 2025|work=Rajya Sabha Debates}}</ref> These measures created local registrars, 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. Although they do not explicitly forbid same-sex marriages, both regulations generally refer to married spouses as "man" and "woman".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.latestlaws.com/bare-acts/state-acts-rules/odisha-state-laws/orissa-hindu-marriages-registration-rules-1960/|title=Orissa Hindu Marriages Registration Rules, 1960|work=LatestLaws.com|access-date=19 December 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.legitquest.com/act/the-orissa-muhammedan-marriages-and-divorces-registration-rules-1976/D8A4|title=Orissa Muhammedan Marriages & Divorces Registration Rules, 1976|work=Legit Quest|access-date=19 December 2025}}</ref>

Most marriages ({{langx|or|ବିବାହ}}, {{transliteration|or|bibāha}}, {{IPA|or|ˈbibahɔ|pron}}; {{langx|sat|ᱵᱟᱯᱞᱟ}},<ref name="santali"/> {{transliteration|sat|bapla}}; {{langx|hoc|𑣁𑣁𑣓𑣔𑣂}},<ref name="ho"/> {{transliteration|hoc|aandi}}; {{langx|unr|𞓓𞓤𞓧𞓤𞓝}},<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.webonary.org/mundari?s=marriage|work=Webonary|title=Mundari Dictionary|access-date=5 May 2026}}</ref> {{transliteration|unr|yemet}}; {{langx|uki|ଡ଼ାଞ୍ଜ}},<ref name="kui"/> {{transliteration|uki|ṛānja}}) in Odisha 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 these unions lack legal recognition in Odisha. In November 2006, two [[Khonds|Khond]] women, Bateka Palang and Maleka Nilsa, were married "in a traditional ceremony, in the presence of family" in a rural town in the [[Koraput district]]. Following the traditional custom of [[bride price]], the {{transliteration|uki|gāṭi muḍa}} ({{langx|uki|ଗାଟି ମୁଡ|label=[[Kui language (India)|Kui]]}}), traditionally paid by the groom to the parents of the bride,<ref name="kui"/> Bateka's family gave a cow and wine to Maleka's family. Bateka's mother was quoted as saying, "We resisted their marriage because it was against our tradition. But they were in no mood to listen and eloped. Finally, we were compelled to get them married according to our tradition. I have accepted Maleka as my daughter-in-law."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/two-orissa-women-defy-norms-get-married/articleshow/312647.cms|title= Two Orissa women defy norms, get married|work=The Times of India|date=4 November 2006}}</ref> Two women were also married in a temple in [[Talcher]] in July 2018 "causing outrage among the villagers and ostracisation of their own families".<ref>{{cite web|url= https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/odisha/2018/jul/13/odisha-two-girls-who-married-each-other-back-with-relatives-after-police-intervention-1842475.html|title= Odisha: Two girls who married each other, back with relatives after police intervention|work=The Nw Indian Express|date=13 July 2018}}</ref> A lesbian couple, Sabitri Parida and Monalisa Nayak, were married in a traditional Hindu ceremony in [[Kendrapara]] in January 2019. The parents of the brides were not supportive of their relationship, and Noyak's father issued a statement alleging that "his daughter is innocent and is under a spell of black magic", urging police to separate the couple.<ref>{{cite web|url= https://www.edexlive.com/news/2019/jan/14/odisha-registers-first-lesbian-marriage-brides-father-blames-black-magic-5031.html|title= Odisha registers first lesbian marriage, bride's father blames black magic|work=edexlive.com|date=14 January 2019}}</ref> The couple left to [[Bhubaneswar]] to avoid family harassment.<ref>{{cite web|url= https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/harassed-by-family-odisha-gay-couple-threatens-to-commit-suicide-1431912-2019-01-16|title= Harassed by family, Odisha gay couple threatens to commit suicide|work=India Today|date=16 January 2019}}</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|or|ସହବାସ ସମ୍ପର୍କ}}, {{transliteration|or|sahabāsa samparka}}, {{IPA|or|ˈsɔhɔbasɔ ˈsɔmpɔɾkɔ|pron}}, or {{lang|or|ଲିଭ୍-ଇନ୍ ସମ୍ପର୍କ}},<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.dharitri.com/live-in-relationships-are-personal-freedom/|language=or|title=ଲିଭ୍‌-ଇନ୍‌ ସମ୍ପର୍କ ବ୍ୟକ୍ତିଗତ ସ୍ବାଧୀନତା|date=30 October 2021|work=Dharitri}}</ref> {{transliteration|or|libh-in samparka}}; {{langx|sat|ᱥᱟᱶᱛᱮ ᱛᱟᱦᱮᱱ ᱥᱳᱢᱵᱳᱱᱫ}}, {{transliteration|sat|saw̃te tahen sombond}}, or {{lang|sat|ᱞᱤᱵ-ᱤᱱ ᱥᱳᱢᱵᱳᱱᱫ}}, {{transliteration|sat|liv-in sombond}}) are not illegal in Odisha. 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. The [[Orissa High Court]] upheld this constitutional right in a notable judgment in August 2020, 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 August 2020, the High Court ruled in ''[[Chinmayee Jena v. State of Odisha]]'' that same-sex live-in relationships are recognised under the constitutional right to life and equality. The court heard a ''[[habeas corpus]]'' plea filed by Sonu Krishna Jena, a transgender man, whose partner had been kidnapped by her family and [[Forced marriage|forced into marriage]] with another man. The family argued that their daughter would eventually "envision a change of heart" and had "taken a path that diverges from societal norms". Citing the Supreme Court's ruling in ''[[National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India]]'', which affirmed fundamental rights for transgender individuals, and ''[[Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India]]'', which decriminalised [[homosexuality]] in India, the Orissa High Court ruled that the couple had the right to live together and continue their relationship, regardless of gender. It held that their relationship was permissible under the fundamental rights to life, equality and equal protection guaranteed by [[Article 21 of the Constitution of India|Article 21 of the Constitution]]. The court also held that women in live-in relationships are protected under the ''[[Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005]]'', similarly to different-sex cohabiting couples. Further, the court ordered police protection and state support for the couple's rights under the [[Constitution of India]].<ref name="odishalivein">{{cite web|url=https://theleaflet.in/orissa-hc-green-signals-same-sex-live-in-relationships/#|title=Orissa HC green signals same sex live-in relationships|website=The Leaflet|date=26 August 2020}}</ref> ''Chinmayee Jena'' was one of the first high court decisions in India recognising the rights of same-sex live-in relationships.

===Transgender and intersex issues===
Like most of [[South Asia]], Odisha recognizes a traditional [[third gender]] community known as ''[[Hijra (South Asia)|hijra]]'' ({{lang|or|ହିନ୍ଜଡା}}, {{transliteration|or|hinjaḍā}}), 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 the various [[List of Scheduled Tribes in Odisha|Scheduled Tribes of Odisha]], namely {{transliteration|uki|meluṛa}} ({{lang|uki|ମେଲୁଡ଼}}) in [[Kui language (India)|Kui]],<ref name="kui">{{cite book|title=A Vocabulary Of The Kui Language|publisher=Asiatic society of Bengal|date=1929|first=W. W.|last=Winfield}}</ref> {{transliteration|sat|cakra}} ({{lang|sat|ᱪᱟᱠᱨᱟ}}) in [[Santali language|Santali]],<ref name="santali">{{cite book|title=English-Santali dictionary|date=1850|page=58|publisher=Bavarian State Library}}</ref> and {{transliteration|hoc|kā pē'jani'i}} ({{lang|hoc|𑣌𑣁𑣁 𑣘𑣈𑣈𑣄𑣎𑣁𑣐𑣓𑣄𑣓}}) in [[Ho language|Ho]];<ref name="ho">{{cite web|url=https://ho.swarthmore.edu/?fields=all&semantic_ids=&q=eunuch|title=Ho Talking Dictionary|access-date=3 June 2024|work=ho.swarthmore.edu}}</ref> 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 Indian Constitution does not require the legalisation of same-sex marriages but affirmed that transgender people may marry opposite-sex partners. Such a marriage had already occurred in [[Narla]] in September 2022 between a man and a transgender woman. However, the marriage lacked legal recognition because the man was already married to a third party, who reportedly approved of the bigamous marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/perfect-union-man-marries-transwoman-wife-s-consent-odisha-1999807-2022-09-13|title=Man marries transwoman in Odisha with wife's 'consent'|work=India Today|date=13 September 2022|first=Mohammad|last=Suffian}}</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|Odisha]]
[[Category:Politics of Odisha]]

Recognition of same-sex unions in Odisha - Revision history

Krishna57edits at 08:00, 5 May 2026