Create a custom practice set
Pick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizGK Question
In Supriyo v. Union of India (2023), the Supreme Court directed the Central Government to constitute a high-level committee to examine rights and entitlements of queer couples, illustrating how courts can facilitate rights protection through institutional mechanisms while respecting legislative domain.
- True
- False
Answer: True
Supriyo (2023) committee mechanism for rights examination: (a) Context: Petitions seeking legal recognition of same-sex marriage under Special Marriage Act, 1954, (b) Supreme Court holding: (i) Declined to legalize same-sex marriage: Recognition involves complex policy considerations best left to Parliament, (ii) BUT affirmed rights of queer couples: Protection from discrimination, right to cohabit, access to services without discrimination, (iii) Directed Central Government to constitute high-level committee to examine rights/entitlements of queer couples, (c) Committee mechanism: (i) Facilitates rights protection: Enables systematic examination of queer rights within existing legal framework, (ii) Respects legislative domain: Committee recommendations inform legislative process, not judicial decree, (iii) Institutional innovation: Courts can facilitate rights protection through institutional mechanisms while respecting separation of powers, (d) Applications: (i) Interim protections: Queer couples can seek protection from discrimination, access to services under existing constitutional provisions, (ii) Legislative follow-up: Committee recommendations may inform future legislation on civil unions, anti-discrimination law, (iii) Institutional reform: Directions for sensitization of police, judiciary, healthcare providers to queer rights, (e) Rationale: (i) Separation of powers: Courts recognize limits of judicial expertise in complex policy design but assert role in protecting constitutional values, (ii) Rights protection: Committee enables systematic examination of queer rights within existing legal framework while legislative process unfolds, (iii) Democratic legitimacy: Policy decisions affecting society should be made through democratic process, informed by expert committee recommendations, (f) Illustrates calibrated judicial philosophy: Judicial restraint in policy domain (marriage recognition), activism in rights protection (non-discrimination, dignity); committee mechanism enables systematic rights examination while respecting democratic process.