Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee preferred to remain non-committal about the day’s developments in Supreme Court which is hearing petitions to legalize same-sex marriages and one which is being vehemently opposed by the Centre.

“I will not say anything right now because the matter is sub-judice. I always love people who love others. But this matter is so sensitive that I will also have to know the pulse of the people. And let me see the court judgment first. Whatever judgment the court gives, we will examine and only then we will let you know,” Banerjee told reporters during a press conference from Nabanna, the state secretariat.

During the course of the second-day’s hearing on the matter, the Centre submitted before the Apex court that all states and union territories be made parties to the proceedings on the pleas seeking legal validation for same-sex marriages.

It was in this context that Banerjee chose not to stick her neck out until the court passed a judgment although she sounded sympathetic to the cause of the petitioners.

Meanwhile, the petitioners seeking legal validation of same-sex marriage on Wednesday urged the Supreme Court to use its plenary power, “prestige and moral authority” to push the society to acknowledge such a union, which would ensure LGBTQIA persons lead a “dignified” life similar to heterosexuals as reported by PTI.

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud was told by senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for one of the petitioners, that “the State should come forward and provide recognition to same-sex marriage.” He referred to the law on widow re-marriage, and said the society did accept it then and the “law acted with alacrity” and the social acceptance followed.

“Here, this court needs to push the society to acknowledge the same-sex marriage. This court, besides the power under Article 142 (which provides SC the plenary power to pass any order necessary for doing complete justice) of the Constitution, has moral authority and it enjoys public confidence. We rely on the prestige and moral authority of this court to ensure that we get our right,” Rohagti told the bench which also comprised Justices S K Kaul, S R Bhat, Hima Kohli and P S Narasimha.

Rohatgi opposed the Centre’s affidavit to involve all States and UTs and said the pleas challenged the Central law, the Special Marriage Act, and just because the subject is there in the concurrent list of the Constitution, states and UTs need not be issued the notices.