- The two are among 18 couples who have petitioned the Supreme Court to allow same sex marriage in India.
- At least three of the petitions have been filed by couples who are raising children together.
The Indian Supreme Court is hearing final arguments on a number of petitions seeking to legalise same-sex marriage. The hearings are being "livestreamed in public interest".
With same sex couples and LGBTQ+ activists hoping for a judgement in their favour and the government and religious leaders strongly opposing same sex union, the debate is turning out to be a lively one.
Both sides have been forcefully putting forth their views. Lawyers for the petitioners have said that marriage is a union of two people - not just a man and woman. They have argued that laws should be changed to reflect that concepts of marriage have changed over time and that same sex couples also desire the respectability of marriage.
But Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who's representing the government, has questioned the court's right to hear the matter at all. He says it's not an issue to be decided by five individuals - the judges - and only the parliament can discuss the socio-legal issue of marriage.
The court has told both sides to finish arguments by Thursday.
Among those keenly watching the proceedings are Dr Kavita Arora and Ankita Khanna, a same sex couple who've been waiting for years to tie the knot.
For Kavita and Ankita, it wasn't love at first sight. The women first became co-workers, then friends, and then came love.
Their families and friends readily accepted their relationship, but 17 years after they met and more than a decade after they started living together, the mental health professionals say they are unable to marry - "something most couples aspire to".
The two are among 18 couples who have petitioned the Supreme Court to allow same sex marriage in India. At least three of the petitions have been filed by couples who are raising children together.
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud called it a matter of "seminal importance" and set up a five-judge constitutional bench - which deals with important questions of law - to rule on it.
The debate is important in a country which is home to an estimated tens of millions of LGBTQ+ people. In 2012, the Indian government put their population at 2.5 million, but calculations using global estimates believe it to be at least 10% of the entire population - or more than 135 million.
Over the years, acceptance of homosexuality has also grown in India. A Pew survey in 2020 had 37% people saying it should be accepted - an increase of 22% from 15% in 2014, the first time the question was asked in the country.
But despite the change, attitudes to sex and sexuality remain largely conservative and activists say most LGBTQ+ people are afraid to come out, even to their friends and family, and attacks on same sex couples routinely make headlines.
So a lot of attention is focussed on what happens in the top court in the coming days - a favourable decision will make India the 35th country in the world to legalise same sex union and set off momentous changes in society. A lot of other laws, such as those governing adoption, divorce and inheritance, will also have to be rejigged.
Ankita and Kavita say they hope it will happen, because that will make it possible for them to marry.
Ankita, a therapist, and Kavita, a psychiatrist, together run a clinic that works with children and young adults with mental health issues and learning disabilities.
On 23 September 2020, they applied to get married.
"We were at that stage in our relationship where we were thinking about marriage. Also, we were tired of fighting the system each time we wanted something done - such as get a joint bank account or a health insurance policy, own a house together, or write a will."
One incident that proved "a catalyst" was when Ankita's mother needed an emergency surgery but Kavita, who had accompanied her to the hospital, says she couldn't sign the consent form "because I couldn't say I was her daughter, nor could I say I was her daughter-in-law".