My goodness. All admirations about his fluency in English? Seriously, no one has any opinion for or against his submission before the honorable SC? No one can save our country's youth.
@@DipayanPyne94 tumko samajh nhi aarha argument ye bolo na. Apni murkhta chupane ke liye dusre ko kyun kharab bol rhe ho ? Seedha bolo tumko itni English samajh nhi aati. Simple
Many comments here showering blind praise on Sai Deepak without any thoughts on the issue itself..... shows the mindset of people.... nicely escaping the issue
Brilliant sir Sai Deepak. Please carry on with your fantastic work. May God bless you and all your loved ones with long, healthy and prosperous lives. Long long India.
My only worry is majority of the HC and SC judges will surely,with their mediocre quality,will rule against Sai Deepakbr abuse of their inferiority complex
Excellent usage of vocabulary which suits to the point of argument. Highly respected language with deep meaning... Great advocate.. my humble respects to JSD Sir... 👏🙌🙌
His advocacy comes out of unbordled honesty and cinviction of purpose.Elaquent,so well prepared and precise presentation..sure the Bench would be bedazzled ..need many more such honest advocates..hats off
Oh please...somewhat same medieval arguments were presented in most western nations by lawyers who sided with backward Christian ideology... now what? No progressive democracy is siding with them..they have all legalized it. The same countries Indians flock to the most
I am partially exasperated at how people in the comment section are focused on his language skillset, vocabulary, etc. but not on the point he is trying to make. His language skills are appreciable, but the deep meaning and, again, the point he's trying to make, is way more vital...
Seriously,i even doubt SC's judges too here, were they able to get his whole argument as they bcoz of tiredness due to listening both sides continuously for hours sometimes miss on many things
The argument is rhetoric based. He is judging what and how the society should behave and the nature of social behaviour. That is unsubstantiated. More yap, less meaning.
The ultimate im in the Supreme Court is NOT your command of English language. To makeyour argument effective, you must speak less, be straightforward and be effective communicator. He failed the test.
Let me put it down simply for you what you call language skill is simple court procedure and he raised brilliant points 1) how this more appropriately a legislative matter as it requires the opinion of multiple stakeholders and communities 2) how our constitution also has its culturally socialist democratic nature 3) that marriage Is a social contract and by breaking it down to an engagement only between two parties we ruin and demoralize the social construct pf it
English is the language of judiciary so that will be the case and his arguments are valid and logical else nothing lasts just because of an excellent orator.
Simply amazing peace of argument put forth effectively entwined with the benign responsibility aimed towards protection of our invaluable Indian culture. Great going Sai Deepak, our future Chief Justice of India.. May he be blessed with all the good things he wishes for
@@taanisharora5577 those who sleep cannot be awaken. Those who are ignorant cannot be made knowledgable. You conclude as to which catwgory you belong to. One more example of the less knowledgable coming into hollow argument. Neither u r western nor u r Indian. U r in between. God bless u
What ego ? In the court, the judge has to listen to both the sides. That's exactly what he's doing. He's giving proper time to the advocates of both the sides and not just giving his verdict directly. I don't see any 'ego' here.
Can we stop this nonsense of addressing judges as " Milords " ? After 75 yrs of independence why are courts still using these nonsense English titles ?
Because just like English imperialists, the people in courts are also imperialists. They are power hungry, authority centric people. Plato would call them Silver Men at Best.
Only if you were able to understand the words behind those polished english and speed talk, you would have understood that your fundamental right is so stoopid.
So his position essentially, hidden in all the flowery language, is that A marriage is not a matter of only the two concerned, consenting, of legal age individuals but includes the entire society as well?
society is involved when relating to which two genders are required to be married, ultimately the case is not between two specific individuals but the community itself. therefore, society is and must be involved and its considerations are required and needed.
I would rather say, the event might be the matter of two individuals but the impacts goes beyond their personal realm ..... Domino effect ! ... I think that's what he meant !
No, his position is that the SC doesn't have the right to determine whether something should be legal or not. The Judiciary should interpret and apply laws in the way in which they were intended to be, they can't just apply laws in whatever way they want to legalise (or illegalise) whatever they want, and try to take the law into their hands. Basically he's saying that the SC should leave this discussion to the parliament, where the question will go through a democratic process and the outcome will consequently represent the will of the people and society.
The lack of comments addressing J Sai Deepak's arguments in the comments section suggests that most people did not fully grasp what he said. It is a sad reality that while everyone is admiring his delivery, they are not engaging with the merits of his arguments.
If i remember i saw it very long back in the live law recordings. Not sure why this is taken so late here and posted. Anyway it is always very nice to hear Shri J Sai Deepak Ji articulate his position. 👌👏👏💥🔥👍🙏✌️
In just one word, this submission before the Hon'ble SC bench by Shri Sai Deepak is brilliant. His eloquence speaks volumes. He has a very bright future. God bless him.🙏👍
@@stealthgamingkills891 he is brillisnt not because he has good communication skills he is brilliant because he placed his view inbest manner with hard facts and reference
J sai deepak arguments are not only in flow but logical and in line with supportive judgements and legislative clauses.. His prayers almost go unhindered by Judges in courts.. 👌
@@ashutoshpadhi2782 are you dumb? He clearly stated that he is not against the SSM but also he is arguing that the only parliament have right to make law. Judges are there just to interpret the law.
This guy is basically saying that old norms of medevial society should prevail over law and individual rights. He may use all the logic and language, but he is basically wrong
Why them call Lords and Lordships? They dont even respects uniqueness of Gender of Male and Female and Space of Marriage. For them individuals interests and freedom even though its crude and unwise it is, they still hang on question of Male and female. Just very painful to see Judiciary Time is wasted. Marriage is Holy and Sacred and its not for gimmick nor Physical companion alone.
Why can't we just call them sir, respected judge or any such terms instead of saying lord / lordship, every now and then ? Actually the CJI and the rest of the judges in SC should think of changing this colonial tradition
@@Aryannnnnn217Two individuals of consenting age should be allowed to get into marriage, regardless of sexuality. Marriage is not "man and woman" as everybody believes
@@cinnamon6452 absolutely. And thats the reason you see all that opaque & thick vocabulary along with laws of Thermodynamics to curtain the absence of logic in his argument.
You did not hear the arguments?. It's not about live and let live the case is about socio-legal implications and constitutional validation of the case. Also the live and let live principle is with certain limitations.
Are u an idiot...Like literally,They are Supreme Court Judges...This argument By JSD was awesome with fluent knowledge of facts but as far as I know that these Judges are capable of understanding better then any of us and they also have a fine good knowledge of the constitution..
This case is much followed and anticipated one ..inspite of such articulate submissions by Sai Deepak sir what will court decide is awaited to be seen ....natural justice or unnatural justice ...time will tell
this man has the power to justify almost every nonsense arguement and everything that has been going wrong in india and we indians have the tendency blindly look upto to someone just becuase we r mesmerized by the level of fluency one has in english? Fighting against the basic rights of certain individuals and why is being applauded ? this is so appauling!
Conclusion: Judicial decisions shouldn't be the first approach for issues that are related to religion and legislation for so many years over the history of Bharat.
sach bolu kuch samaj nahi aya but sunne mein bahut accha laga kash me bhi iska 50% english bol pata. Kudos to Shree J Sai Deepak sir. Thank you so much for everything you are doing for dharma.
How stupids comments can be (most off ) What i am seeing is just How good he is in english Omg his fluency I was looking for some brain storming perspectives but soon realised that most of the audience that is supporting jsd dont even got 20% 😂
Bloody sophist and purely argumentative statement made by a man who JUST have command over a language. And the youth if the country lauding it? Just plain sad.
this sort of argument about preserving this "social character" were literally used to defend sati, child marriage, untouchability and most of india's social ills, except back then i dont think there were people appreciating those people's "language and vocabulary" without understanding half of what's being said
Saying "my lords" should be banned, ok once in the opening is fine but beyond that, it is so fking annoying. This colonial way of functioning of courts must be changed.
Listen, to his arguments not the articulation and verbosity. Because, in a nutshell, he stated heteronormativity is the norm which is an opinion he is entitled to have. But, it is not his to impose.
It is not solely the institution of marriage in its societal framework. It’s in the legal protection to the individuals involved. For example, spousal insurance or inheritance rights of spouses
Hence, you are dumb. He is stating the relevant outcomes of legalising such marriage. How domestic violence law will be implemented? How will the alimony go between same sex couple after divorce? And also child adoption is also a valid point. What will happen to child if same sex couple got divorce? Who will secure Custody? These are some practical reasoning which your stupid will grasp.
His knowledge level is brilliant and argument is awesome ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤ He forced to judges to talk themselves क्योंकि इसका ज्ञान एक व्यक्ति के संभालने की चीज नही है 😅😅😂😂😂😂😂
Anybody who's regularly in touch with news can fairly get what he's saying. And i think he should be appreciated regardless of his arguments too if one doesn't agrees with him BUT he's crisp and too the point And not like other elderly lawyers eating SC's time unnecessarily
@@Avant-garde1611 not really , other than being articulate there was not much substance in his arguments . You can't support a cause just because the speaker has got good oratory skills , that is exactly how u get convinced without realising why are u even supporting. Secondly what older people are u talking about. Other side is Kapil sibbal the greatest lawyer ever . There's Tushar Mehta also , our solicitor general , again top lawyer. J Sai Deepak is still a rookie lawyer whose articulation might help sway the mass on a speech but his arguments in court don't stand.
@@ramchandramohan182his only 2 main ideas were : 1) To determine a law on this is it legislative (parliament) prerogative or is it judicial. He kept saying society , legislative to show that such matters are social institution governed by laws and judiciary shouldn't intervene 2) his second idea was arguing that yes opposing same sex marriage is conservative but does conservatism has no place in constitution? These arguments are okay maybe decent but def not that deserves like massive appreciation. It's 5/10 at best. Majorly because any law graduate would come to the exact same arguments the first time they sees this case. So there is no value addition and so are basic arguments. Plus his arguments are not enriched with past judgements or other legislation in diff countries as an example. It's looks like he is preaching an idea he believes to be true without showing any evidence of it.
@ J Sai Deepak is just a good orator but not a good debator. He talks of very abstract stuff which is mostly opinionated and not backed by simple logical arguments. I have been hearing Supreme Court live hearings these days and if you hear people like Mr. Sibal, they argue in black, white and grey.
Basically J Sai Deepak said that since marriage is a social institution, society must have a say in it. And since society elects legislature , thus their opinion should matter. Probably legislatures can have a say in it, but not the judiciary. If judiciary or any sub section of society wants to change social norms, they should not use top down approach but go for social reforms by social leaders and NGOs. And finally he says that we have so many other social issues such as prostitution etc which need court’s attention before going in such a matter. Summary of the summary: it is not for judiciary to decide on this matter.
Agar society hi decide karti toh aaj intercaste marriage bhi illegal hoti bus yeh bolne ki batein ha jab law bnega tab waqt k sath socity ko accept karna hi parega
@@krishnas.7373Society changes with time. All societal changes came thru parliament. Did dowry harassment act and sc st come from court. It was enacted by parliament because society supported it. No politician would do it unless it has societal acceptance.
@@karthika560 section 377 decriminalized hone se kafi acceptance aayi thi joh ki supreme court k wajah se hua dono k pass kafi power h joh bhi kare changes toh aate hi ha logo ko kya hi fark parta ha decision chahe sc se aaye ya parliament adhe logo ko toh yeh bhi nhi pta hoga dono ka kam kya kya h
@@krishnas.7373 you mean before 377 no one was doing it? The law was hardly ever enforced and it existed only on paper. Also court deemed to be fundamental right violation hence 377 was struck. However court here said to establish laws for civil union and allow provisions for inheritance, taxation and adoption. People don’t want this included under marriage act as hindus believe objective of marriage is procreation.
युद्धबंदी के रूप में महिलाएं आपकी सेक्स गुलाम हैं कुरान के अनुसार गुलाम महिला सेक्स गुलाम होती है। और विवाहित स्त्रियाँ भी तुम्हारे लिए वर्जित हैं, सिवाय उन स्त्रियों के जो तुम्हारे दाहिने हाथ की हों। [यह] तुम्हारे लिए अल्लाह का आदेश है। और तुम्हारे लिए इन से परे [अन्य सभी] वैध हैं, [बशर्ते] कि तुम उन्हें अपनी संपत्ति से [उपहार] देकर पवित्रता की इच्छा करो, न कि अवैध संभोग की इच्छा से। अतः तुम उनसे जो कुछ भी भोगो, उसके बदले उन्हें दायित्व के रूप में उनका उचित मुआवजा दो। और दायित्व से परे जिस बात पर आप परस्पर सहमत होते हैं, उसके लिए आप पर कोई दोष नहीं है। निस्संदेह, अल्लाह जानने वाला और तत्वदर्शी है। (अध्याय 4:24)कुरान में कई बार दाहिना हाथ रखने का उल्लेख किया गया है। 7वीं शताब्दी के अरब के समय में, युद्ध में पकड़े गए किसी भी व्यक्ति को राइट हैंड पास्ड यानी गुलाम कहा जाता था। यदि आपने किसी महिला को यौन दासी के रूप में पकड़ लिया है तो इसकी अनुमति है। आपको उनसे शादी करने की ज़रूरत नहीं है, अल्लाह ने उन्हें आपके लिए सेक्स टॉय बनने की इजाज़त दी है। असहमति में? आइए सुनन अबी दाऊद किताब 12 से एक हदीस पर नजर डालें यानी विवाह (किताब अल-निकाह) हदीस 110, ग्रेड: सहीहअबू सईद अल खुदरी ने कहा, “अल्लाह के रसूल ने हुनैन की लड़ाई के अवसर पर अवतास में एक सैन्य अभियान भेजा। वे अपने शत्रु से मिले और उनसे युद्ध किया। उन्होंने उन्हें हरा दिया और बंदी बना लिया। अल्लाह के रसूल के कुछ साथी अपने बुतपरस्त पतियों के कारण महिला बंदियों के साथ संबंध बनाने के लिए अनिच्छुक थे। तो, अल्लाह तआला ने कुरान की आयत भेजी "और उन (बंदियों) को छोड़कर जिन्हें आपके दाहिने हाथ ने पकड़ लिया है, आपके लिए सभी विवाहित महिलाएं (वर्जित हैं)।" कहने का तात्पर्य यह है कि जब वे अपनी प्रतीक्षा अवधि पूरी कर लेते हैं तो वे उनके लिए वैध हैं।सही मुस्लिम से हदीस, विवाह की पुस्तक, हदीस 3371, ग्रेड: सही अबू सिरमा ने अबू सईद अल खादरी (अल्लाह उससे प्रसन्न) से कहा: 0 अबू सईद, क्या आपने अल्लाह के दूत को अल-अज़ल का उल्लेख करते हुए सुना है? उन्होंने कहा: हाँ, और कहा: हम अल्लाह के दूत के साथ बाहर गए थे? बिल-मुस्तलिक के अभियान पर और कुछ उत्कृष्ट अरब महिलाओं को बंदी बना लिया; और हम ने उन्हें चाहा, क्योंकि हम अपनी पत्नियों के वियोग से पीड़ित थे, (परन्तु साथ ही) हम ने उनके लिये छुड़ौती भी चाही। इसलिए हमने उनके साथ संभोग करने का फैसला किया, लेकिन 'एज़ल' (गर्भाधान से बचने के लिए वीर्य के उत्सर्जन से पहले पुरुष यौन अंग को बाहर निकालना) का पालन करते हुए। लेकिन हमने कहा: हम एक कार्य कर रहे हैं जबकि अल्लाह का दूत हमारे बीच में है; उससे क्यों नहीं पूछा? तो हमने अल्लाह के रसूल से पूछा, और उन्होंने कहा: इससे कोई फर्क नहीं पड़ता कि तुम ऐसा नहीं करते, क्योंकि पुनरुत्थान के दिन तक पैदा होने वाली हर आत्मा पैदा होगी।
It is well understood.. there are subtitles for the same reason.. he is super fast express.. he said 20 mins is less.. but with his speed.. he in fact finished in 15 mins..
To all individuals who are commending J Sai Deepak on his command over his english, I will give you something else to commend this man as well, here is what he said: 1. Who Should Decide? He argues that changing important social norms should be the job of the lawmakers, not the judges. This is because lawmakers involve the public and follow a detailed process to make decisions. 2. Society's Voice: He believes that society should have a say in big decisions, like changing marriage laws. It’s not just about two people getting married but about how marriage is seen and valued by everyone in society. 3. Balancing Values: He questions if a democracy should only support liberal views and ignore conservative ones. Society should be able to decide what changes are acceptable and where to draw the line. 4. Proper Procedures: He points out that there are strict steps to follow when making new laws. This includes consulting different ministries, getting cabinet approval, and the President’s sign-off. Judges shouldn’t bypass this thorough process. 5. Marriage is Social: Marriage isn't just a private deal between two people; it affects the whole society. Therefore, society should have a say in any changes to marriage laws. 6. Judicial vs. Legislative Roles: He warns against judges making decisions that should be left to lawmakers, as it can lead to confusion and overstepping of boundaries. 7. International Perspective: He mentions that international guidelines don’t force countries to change their marriage laws. Each country can decide for itself. 8. Long-Term Impact: He’s concerned that if judges start making these decisions, it could set a bad precedent for the future, undermining the role of lawmakers. He also thinks we should focus on more immediate issues, like preventing the exploitation of transgender individuals, before making big social changes. In short, the J Sai Deepak is saying we should let lawmakers handle these big decisions, involve the public in the process, and not let judges overstep their roles.
Seperation of power is basic structure of constitution. Any legislation on any aspect HAS to be done via parliament and not judiciary. Good argument by Sai
Marriage as an institution being individualised is a problem? Since when lol, what social character does marriage have besides that between the individuals? Bullshit
His flow of thought, argument and language is impressive.
I lawyer should know how to do that much!
i just hope its legalized lots of people will be pissed..so much fun.
Not just impressive. It is brilliant.
@@nirajsingh8403 Legalize what??
@@nirajsingh8403pissing people off is fun to you ?
This man will go deep in indian judicial history. And he will be remembered for long time.
We need him in BJP.
Like subramanian swamy and jethmalani
@@digitalbath6057let people work from outside for the sanatan
For speaking good english?
@@suyogshishupal30
If your focus is only on his english , you are right there ...
Even hon'ble CJI knows he is the man
He was put in place by the senior judge.
Nah it's just you
@@ShawonIn Haan hum galat nahi hai , judge galat hai. Naach na aawe aangan teda.
@@pnthrillz for real! 😂
@@pnthrillz BS. That senior judge was egoistic. That idiot will retire soon.
There he has spoken the quantity of English in 20 minutes that I would speak in an entire year 😂
It is not the English that is impressive here. Even Shashi Tharoor or my English teacher could do that. It is the way he structured his arguments.
@@death_parade but people are only impressed by his speaking skills...bhale kuch smj bhi na pade fir bhi andho ki tarah j sai j sai karte hai 😂
@@pragneshkumar2517don't generalise people, not everyone is pragneshKumar (a.k.a you)
@@Emperor-x9eyou nailed him....😁
I agreeed
My goodness. All admirations about his fluency in English?
Seriously, no one has any opinion for or against his submission before the honorable SC?
No one can save our country's youth.
Wtf🤡🤡
@@AdityaKumar-nr9staye
@@AdityaKumar-pz3ko 🗿🗿
Yes....that is the irony...
His English is being appreciated even in his speeches related to other topics like Hinduism etc...
😂
I am simply overawed by his articulation, fluency, vocabulary, sense if economy of time and words. ..well everything. He never disappoints.
Lol
@@DipayanPyne94 kya lol? 😂😂 tumko bahut dikkat hai ?
@@adityadwivedi7672 Hai bhai. In general, aise type ke log often engage in Sophistry. Phir toh problem hogi bhai.
@@DipayanPyne94 tumko samajh nhi aarha argument ye bolo na. Apni murkhta chupane ke liye dusre ko kyun kharab bol rhe ho ? Seedha bolo tumko itni English samajh nhi aati. Simple
Many comments here showering blind praise on Sai Deepak without any thoughts on the issue itself..... shows the mindset of people.... nicely escaping the issue
Brilliant sir Sai Deepak. Please carry on with your fantastic work. May God bless you and all your loved ones with long, healthy and prosperous lives. Long long India.
My only worry is majority of the HC and SC judges will surely,with their mediocre quality,will rule against Sai Deepakbr abuse of their inferiority complex
@@suryanarayan1926 lol u have IC
Sri Sai Deepak put forward his argument with clear thinking, excellent choice of words and showcasing his command over the language 👏🏻.
And no logic
@@kingshorntrue and also that's not the way one should speak, he goes on and on without breaks and his tone is rude too
@@neilbajwa8689 he talks just like that in TV shows too, phool* watch his debates gawar
@@RahulVerma-iv8phhe don't stop an armchair critique for no reason
@@kingshorn Yes.. You have that logic, no?.. 😂😂😂😂😂
Unmatchable and historical argument by young warrior of laws... Justice system definitely going to be revolutionized very soon 🚩
Excellent usage of vocabulary which suits to the point of argument. Highly respected language with deep meaning... Great advocate.. my humble respects to JSD Sir... 👏🙌🙌
Did u get what he's saying???
I wish to see him as CJI in future, Indian justice system needs people like him. 🙏
he is advocate, not judge
@@mangekyo151advocates are become judge. Didn't you know.
You find his real thought he is preparing for CJI this time period
@@mangekyo151eminent jurist can bcm a CJI
@@ATAURATV To become CJI, you first need to be a judge
His advocacy comes out of unbordled honesty and cinviction of purpose.Elaquent,so well prepared and precise presentation..sure the Bench would be bedazzled ..need many more such honest advocates..hats off
Sorry for the spelling errors in my post🙏
@@n.vraman3953 😂😂😂typo they say, for typing wrong spellings. Accepted 🙏🙏🙏
Yes.typo ,sir
Oh please...somewhat same medieval arguments were presented in most western nations by lawyers who sided with backward Christian ideology... now what? No progressive democracy is siding with them..they have all legalized it. The same countries Indians flock to the most
😅😅😅
Awesome articulation and to the point. We are proud to have such type of lawyers in our midst .
I am partially exasperated at how people in the comment section are focused on his language skillset, vocabulary, etc. but not on the point he is trying to make. His language skills are appreciable, but the deep meaning and, again, the point he's trying to make, is way more vital...
Seriously,i even doubt SC's judges too here, were they able to get his whole argument as they bcoz of tiredness due to listening both sides continuously for hours sometimes miss on many things
The argument is rhetoric based. He is judging what and how the society should behave and the nature of social behaviour. That is unsubstantiated. More yap, less meaning.
@@aniketshukla3824 Yeah it looks more yap for a westernized mindset.
The ultimate im in the Supreme Court is NOT your command of English language. To makeyour argument effective, you must speak less, be straightforward and be effective communicator. He failed the test.
I really agree but when I can't understand his point, all I m left with is to appreciate his way of speaking which is so hard to comprehend 😂
the amount of people who are impressed solely because oh his language skills 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
Colonial mindset
Let me put it down simply for you what you call language skill is simple court procedure and he raised brilliant points 1) how this more appropriately a legislative matter as it requires the opinion of multiple stakeholders and communities
2) how our constitution also has its culturally socialist democratic nature
3) that marriage Is a social contract and by breaking it down to an engagement only between two parties we ruin and demoralize the social construct pf it
Exactly 😂
English is the language of judiciary so that will be the case and his arguments are valid and logical else nothing lasts just because of an excellent orator.
Fact
Best advocate in india
Nopes
@@pnthrillz yepes
😂 best, English acchi bolo to best.
@@kapild.3681 Aree laudam Chand uske arguments suno counter se defending tk fir smjh jaoge
@@kapild.3681tujhe samajh aayi 😂😂
Simply amazing peace of argument put forth effectively entwined with the benign responsibility aimed towards protection of our invaluable Indian culture. Great going Sai Deepak, our future Chief Justice of India.. May he be blessed with all the good things he wishes for
use 4 more fancy big words, and you'll be close to the rigour of JSD's argumentation, which is 0
@@taanisharora5577 those who sleep cannot be awaken. Those who are ignorant cannot be made knowledgable. You conclude as to which catwgory you belong to. One more example of the less knowledgable coming into hollow argument. Neither u r western nor u r Indian. U r in between. God bless u
EGO of CJI is on TOP, GOD please save Maa Bharathi from WOKE mindset.
So true .. ye hate bas jaldi se ..woke scumbag
Pura suna tumne? EGO to kahi nahy dikha...ya perception hai ye tumhara?
This is not ego.. its the process.. our court should be neutral whenever hearing any case.. and this is what our CJI is doing.. good job sir
What ego ?
In the court, the judge has to listen to both the sides. That's exactly what he's doing. He's giving proper time to the advocates of both the sides and not just giving his verdict directly.
I don't see any 'ego' here.
@@krishkumariitbhu bro in logo ko keh diya gaya hai ki CJI ego lekar chal raha hai.. aur ye andh budhhi usiko propagate karta phirta hai
Can we stop this nonsense of addressing judges as " Milords " ? After 75 yrs of independence why are courts still using these nonsense English titles ?
Because just like English imperialists, the people in courts are also imperialists. They are power hungry, authority centric people. Plato would call them Silver Men at Best.
It can’t be as long as those milords likes & enjoying such treatments quietly.
I agree. So, embarrassing 😮
Correct statement. May be we should be calling them Judge.
@@balajinarasimhan533 Why even that ? Even names are enough.
We know who should resign.....Sai Deepak is absolutely awesome. Everyone is wanting to destroy Bharat.
ljasfjalksdjflkasjdfma
100% true and people are simply justifying this fact.
Speak only sanskrit in bharat my dear saar
No amount of polished English & speed talk can negate the fundamental right of marriage between two people.
Thank you, Thank you very much sir!
Only if you were able to understand the words behind those polished english and speed talk, you would have understood that your fundamental right is so stoopid.
Whats there to thank here😅
Chudakad ye pata chalta tumlog ko English k bare mei kuch nhi aata chutiya type ki English h Sai ka
Homophobe hai
So his position essentially, hidden in all the flowery language, is that A marriage is not a matter of only the two concerned, consenting, of legal age individuals but includes the entire society as well?
to sum it up, yes
society is involved when relating to which two genders are required to be married, ultimately the case is not between two specific individuals but the community itself. therefore, society is and must be involved and its considerations are required and needed.
You are not separate from society.
I would rather say, the event might be the matter of two individuals but the impacts goes beyond their personal realm ..... Domino effect ! ... I think that's what he meant !
No, his position is that the SC doesn't have the right to determine whether something should be legal or not. The Judiciary should interpret and apply laws in the way in which they were intended to be, they can't just apply laws in whatever way they want to legalise (or illegalise) whatever they want, and try to take the law into their hands.
Basically he's saying that the SC should leave this discussion to the parliament, where the question will go through a democratic process and the outcome will consequently represent the will of the people and society.
Society should not be bothered about two individuals wanting to live together. Common sense.
This isn't about them living together, they are and should be free to do that, it's about govt recognition of their marriage
😂😂😂😂😂
They should live together but there should be no legal status of there living
Once this law is passed, we will move onto teaching gender ideology to kids in schools, like they do in amrika
@@MorBius-fu2qrbut people without brains will still not understand that
The lack of comments addressing J Sai Deepak's arguments in the comments section suggests that most people did not fully grasp what he said. It is a sad reality that while everyone is admiring his delivery, they are not engaging with the merits of his arguments.
Sai Deepak is 💯 brilliant 👏 👌 👍
Brilliant argument ❤❤❤
Wonderful, Sai rocks!!
If i remember i saw it very long back in the live law recordings. Not sure why this is taken so late here and posted. Anyway it is always very nice to hear Shri J Sai Deepak Ji articulate his position. 👌👏👏💥🔥👍🙏✌️
In just one word, this submission before the Hon'ble SC bench by Shri Sai Deepak is brilliant. His eloquence speaks volumes. He has a very bright future. God bless him.🙏👍
This Guy is Miraculously Brilliant!
If this is what you call brilliance then hey Man,you are very far far away from the truths and things happening on the ground level
@stealthgamingkills891 I think you need that advice more than anyone else.
Actually Miraculous.
Mentally healthy Advocate till now.
😂
@@stealthgamingkills891 he is brillisnt not because he has good communication skills he is brilliant because he placed his view inbest manner with hard facts and reference
The only time I have not agreed with him.
I'm disappointed that an intelligent person like him failed to see the humanity in this case
Khusra marriage not allowed 😢
We will go from humanity to wokism just like in america. No need for such disgusting things
J Sai Deepak! His brilliance shines through.
J sai deepak arguments are not only in flow but logical and in line with supportive judgements and legislative clauses.. His prayers almost go unhindered by Judges in courts.. 👌
he simply trying to argue against same sex marriage using fancy words, nothing else
@@ashutoshpadhi2782 are you dumb? He clearly stated that he is not against the SSM but also he is arguing that the only parliament have right to make law. Judges are there just to interpret the law.
An encyclopaedia with clear communication.Sai Deepak is an asset 🎉🎊🥰
The salves, Malanis, Mistries, sibals, etc etc just pale before this jagurnaut sai deepak.
Hail sai deepak, the future PM of india
@@muthyamyandamuri4420 💯
Hats Off!
So brilliantly put Mr.Sai deepak. We need someone in the courts like you. Sincerely appreciate the way you have put up the case for arguments.
You all are true sense patriots.
J Sai Deepak & you are doing great.
Just waiting for Republic TV Global.
Kab aayega bhai ye Republic Global have been hearing about it for more than two years now
This guy is basically saying that old norms of medevial society should prevail over law and individual rights. He may use all the logic and language, but he is basically wrong
so effectively u are saying we don't need scientific argument i have already made up my mind on what's right
Two people can live together, can indulge into physical activities they want. However that doesn't change the meaning of Vivah, Nikah or Marriage.
@@eternallightoftruthwhat does vivah mean acc to the sources you're referring to?
We don't need mental patients to get married. Just look at the cultureless western countries.
He's wrong according to your system of belief
Why them call Lords and Lordships? They dont even respects uniqueness of Gender of Male and Female and Space of Marriage. For them individuals interests and freedom even though its crude and unwise it is, they still hang on question of Male and female. Just very painful to see Judiciary Time is wasted.
Marriage is Holy and Sacred and its not for gimmick nor Physical companion alone.
Why can't we just call them sir, respected judge or any such terms instead of saying lord / lordship, every now and then ?
Actually the CJI and the rest of the judges in SC should think of changing this colonial tradition
Well said. Very true👍🙏💐
The Argument is simply outstanding!
So well argued. Bravo 👏 👏. Brilliant as always.
He is undoubtedly the best gem .....long live Sai Deepak.
Superb argument....very intellectual. As mentioned by Deepak, judiciary cannot usurp other organs of state or society's powers.
Sai Deapak's argument is absolutely Illogical. He is missing the basic common sense aspect rather than anything else...
and what's that? please mention
@@Aryannnnnn217 he is missing some basic common sense .😏
@@Aryannnnnn217Two individuals of consenting age should be allowed to get into marriage, regardless of sexuality. Marriage is not "man and woman" as everybody believes
@@cinnamon6452 For your kind Knowledge, SC rejected it
@@cinnamon6452 absolutely. And thats the reason you see all that opaque & thick vocabulary along with laws of Thermodynamics to curtain the absence of logic in his argument.
What an erudition! 🎉
Genius and brilliantly presented by J.Sai Deepak.
J.Sai Deepak Should be in Hague as top notch Lawyer
my opinion live and let others live as they wish and do accordingly unless its hurting someone else directly
Absolutely
💯
PERIOD.
It is hurting the 96% population directly.
You did not hear the arguments?. It's not about live and let live the case is about socio-legal implications and constitutional validation of the case. Also the live and let live principle is with certain limitations.
So sharp with his words while still not toppling the lordship's composure. That's an art.
I wonder if judges understood anything or not?😂😂
I didn't😢
Are u an idiot...Like literally,They are Supreme Court Judges...This argument By JSD was awesome with fluent knowledge of facts but as far as I know that these Judges are capable of understanding better then any of us and they also have a fine good knowledge of the constitution..
😂😂😂😂😂
That's why they are judges...not like you
Can't say about them, but I didn't understand what was he talking about
Superb argument 👌
The amount of people glazing upon his fluency of english overlooking the points that he made is the real concern in this country
HITLER BHI BAHUT ACHHA BOLTA THA, BAHUT ACHHA BOL LENE SE KISI KI BAAT BAHUT ACHHI HO NAHI JATI HAI.
Hahaha...ye baat padhe likhe gawaro ko samajh nhi aati.. isiliye toh sirf badi badi baatein karke kitne neta log iss desh ko loot rahe hai
Exactly
Please open your mind and actually LISTEN.
Seedha seedha bolo tumhe kuch samjha nai😅
That's right brother. His arguments were full of flaws. He was siding with conservatives.
Sai Deepak is one of the gems of India.
Accidentally Privileged who are straight have so many things to say about who are not.
What's new?
Exactly
It is not about previlage. It is about common sense.
It is about living in the same society together with different opinions but also considering different safety and futuristic aspects.
@@sampatkalyan3103 use your common sense you will understand that it is privilege
@@kingshorn how about you using your common sense instead of labeling everything as privilege.
I cant comprehend what he is even speaking with that fluency. Commendable job.
This case is much followed and anticipated one ..inspite of such articulate submissions by Sai Deepak sir what will court decide is awaited to be seen ....natural justice or unnatural justice ...time will tell
His clarity of thoughts, choices of words are just so impressive!!!!!
Sai Deepak, in-depth analysis and precise clear argument.
this man has the power to justify almost every nonsense arguement and everything that has been going wrong in india and we indians have the tendency blindly look upto to someone just becuase we r mesmerized by the level of fluency one has in english? Fighting against the basic rights of certain individuals and why is being applauded ? this is so appauling!
Is he against equal marraige ??
@@aarthi4412yes
@@Himanshi.Y I like this guy already
fr these people literally understood nothing and maybe thats the reason they are appreciating him lol
did you even watch the whole video before commenting?
Brilliant! Brilliant J sai Deepak ji.Awesome argument.We want to see you as future CJI .
Jai ho! Jai Sai Deepak. Salute to your thought process
Conclusion: Judicial decisions shouldn't be the first approach for issues that are related to religion and legislation for so many years over the history of Bharat.
Wow... Goosebumps❤😊
sach bolu kuch samaj nahi aya but sunne mein bahut accha laga kash me bhi iska 50% english bol pata. Kudos to Shree J Sai Deepak sir. Thank you so much for everything you are doing for dharma.
Kudos mt likh phir
😂😂
Great job by republic 👍Live streaming how judicially works..... Its democracy wr must know how judge make judgment's... 👍great
Long live J Sai Deepak Sir
Jai Hind Sir
How stupids comments can be (most off )
What i am seeing is just
How good he is in english
Omg his fluency
I was looking for some brain storming perspectives but soon realised that most of the audience that is supporting jsd dont even got 20% 😂
Lol, flunked your primary?
Agreed
On what basis are you opposing then!?😂
I admire 'sir' Sai Deepak no matter what..
Bloody sophist and purely argumentative statement made by a man who JUST have command over a language. And the youth if the country lauding it? Just plain sad.
True
He is so young. I believe that he wiil be the greatest advocate of our country 💥
this sort of argument about preserving this "social character" were literally used to defend sati, child marriage, untouchability and most of india's social ills, except back then i dont think there were people appreciating those people's "language and vocabulary" without understanding half of what's being said
women ☕
So true
this is so on point
The only sane comment. Kudos miss
Quiet libbie
This guy is pure magic❤😍🔥
Congratulations for winning case.
Inshort he is telling the majority should decide what happens in society
the arguments JSD is putting forward are excellent
Saying "my lords" should be banned, ok once in the opening is fine but beyond that, it is so fking annoying. This colonial way of functioning of courts must be changed.
One of the longest argue without using the word "my lord"
Listen, to his arguments not the articulation and verbosity. Because, in a nutshell, he stated heteronormativity is the norm which is an opinion he is entitled to have. But, it is not his to impose.
It is not solely the institution of marriage in its societal framework. It’s in the legal protection to the individuals involved. For example, spousal insurance or inheritance rights of spouses
Those who participate in the norm, is out of discussion? Well, he is a representative of heteronormativity. Hence, the argument stands invalid.
@@snehathomas8336 his simple argument courts cannot make a law.
Marriage is between a man and woman.
Hence, you are dumb. He is stating the relevant outcomes of legalising such marriage. How domestic violence law will be implemented? How will the alimony go between same sex couple after divorce? And also child adoption is also a valid point. What will happen to child if same sex couple got divorce? Who will secure Custody? These are some practical reasoning which your stupid will grasp.
His knowledge level is brilliant and argument is awesome ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
He forced to judges to talk themselves क्योंकि इसका ज्ञान एक व्यक्ति के संभालने की चीज नही है 😅😅😂😂😂😂😂
There wouldnt be this appreciation if only people wouldve actually understood his arguments tbh
We have understood his arguments very well....after that only we are saying that he is one of the bests .
Anybody who's regularly in touch with news can fairly get what he's saying.
And i think he should be appreciated regardless of his arguments too if one doesn't agrees with him BUT he's crisp and too the point And not like other elderly lawyers eating SC's time unnecessarily
@@Avant-garde1611 not really , other than being articulate there was not much substance in his arguments . You can't support a cause just because the speaker has got good oratory skills , that is exactly how u get convinced without realising why are u even supporting.
Secondly what older people are u talking about. Other side is Kapil sibbal the greatest lawyer ever . There's Tushar Mehta also , our solicitor general , again top lawyer.
J Sai Deepak is still a rookie lawyer whose articulation might help sway the mass on a speech but his arguments in court don't stand.
@@zookush1 On what basis are you opposing his argument then?
@@ramchandramohan182his only 2 main ideas were :
1) To determine a law on this is it legislative (parliament) prerogative or is it judicial. He kept saying society , legislative to show that such matters are social institution governed by laws and judiciary shouldn't intervene
2) his second idea was arguing that yes opposing same sex marriage is conservative but does conservatism has no place in constitution?
These arguments are okay maybe decent but def not that deserves like massive appreciation. It's 5/10 at best. Majorly because any law graduate would come to the exact same arguments the first time they sees this case. So there is no value addition and so are basic arguments. Plus his arguments are not enriched with past judgements or other legislation in diff countries as an example. It's looks like he is preaching an idea he believes to be true without showing any evidence of it.
@ J Sai Deepak is just a good orator but not a good debator. He talks of very abstract stuff which is mostly opinionated and not backed by simple logical arguments. I have been hearing Supreme Court live hearings these days and if you hear people like Mr. Sibal, they argue in black, white and grey.
Basically J Sai Deepak said that since marriage is a social institution, society must have a say in it. And since society elects legislature , thus their opinion should matter. Probably legislatures can have a say in it, but not the judiciary. If judiciary or any sub section of society wants to change social norms, they should not use top down approach but go for social reforms by social leaders and NGOs. And finally he says that we have so many other social issues such as prostitution etc which need court’s attention before going in such a matter.
Summary of the summary: it is not for judiciary to decide on this matter.
great summary
Agar society hi decide karti toh aaj intercaste marriage bhi illegal hoti bus yeh bolne ki batein ha jab law bnega tab waqt k sath socity ko accept karna hi parega
@@krishnas.7373Society changes with time. All societal changes came thru parliament.
Did dowry harassment act and sc st come from court.
It was enacted by parliament because society supported it.
No politician would do it unless it has societal acceptance.
@@karthika560 section 377 decriminalized hone se kafi acceptance aayi thi joh ki supreme court k wajah se hua dono k pass kafi power h joh bhi kare changes toh aate hi ha logo ko kya hi fark parta ha decision chahe sc se aaye ya parliament adhe logo ko toh yeh bhi nhi pta hoga dono ka kam kya kya h
@@krishnas.7373 you mean before 377 no one was doing it? The law was hardly ever enforced and it existed only on paper.
Also court deemed to be fundamental right violation hence 377 was struck.
However court here said to establish laws for civil union and allow provisions for inheritance, taxation and adoption.
People don’t want this included under marriage act as hindus believe objective of marriage is procreation.
Watching Deepak sir in black coat arguing in the court........is a real treat to eyes ❤
He Is Totally an Educated Andhbhakt!!!
Tu kya uneducated gand bhakth kya
Ja na andhnamzi
युद्धबंदी के रूप में महिलाएं आपकी सेक्स गुलाम हैं
कुरान के अनुसार गुलाम महिला सेक्स गुलाम होती है।
और विवाहित स्त्रियाँ भी तुम्हारे लिए वर्जित हैं, सिवाय उन स्त्रियों के जो तुम्हारे दाहिने हाथ की हों। [यह] तुम्हारे लिए अल्लाह का आदेश है। और तुम्हारे लिए इन से परे [अन्य सभी] वैध हैं, [बशर्ते] कि तुम उन्हें अपनी संपत्ति से [उपहार] देकर पवित्रता की इच्छा करो, न कि अवैध संभोग की इच्छा से। अतः तुम उनसे जो कुछ भी भोगो, उसके बदले उन्हें दायित्व के रूप में उनका उचित मुआवजा दो। और दायित्व से परे जिस बात पर आप परस्पर सहमत होते हैं, उसके लिए आप पर कोई दोष नहीं है। निस्संदेह, अल्लाह जानने वाला और तत्वदर्शी है। (अध्याय 4:24)कुरान में कई बार दाहिना हाथ रखने का उल्लेख किया गया है। 7वीं शताब्दी के अरब के समय में, युद्ध में पकड़े गए किसी भी व्यक्ति को राइट हैंड पास्ड यानी गुलाम कहा जाता था। यदि आपने किसी महिला को यौन दासी के रूप में पकड़ लिया है तो इसकी अनुमति है। आपको उनसे शादी करने की ज़रूरत नहीं है, अल्लाह ने उन्हें आपके लिए सेक्स टॉय बनने की इजाज़त दी है। असहमति में? आइए सुनन अबी दाऊद किताब 12 से एक हदीस पर नजर डालें यानी विवाह (किताब अल-निकाह) हदीस 110, ग्रेड: सहीहअबू सईद अल खुदरी ने कहा, “अल्लाह के रसूल ने हुनैन की लड़ाई के अवसर पर अवतास में एक सैन्य अभियान भेजा। वे अपने शत्रु से मिले और उनसे युद्ध किया। उन्होंने उन्हें हरा दिया और बंदी बना लिया। अल्लाह के रसूल के कुछ साथी अपने बुतपरस्त पतियों के कारण महिला बंदियों के साथ संबंध बनाने के लिए अनिच्छुक थे। तो, अल्लाह तआला ने कुरान की आयत भेजी "और उन (बंदियों) को छोड़कर जिन्हें आपके दाहिने हाथ ने पकड़ लिया है, आपके लिए सभी विवाहित महिलाएं (वर्जित हैं)।" कहने का तात्पर्य यह है कि जब वे अपनी प्रतीक्षा अवधि पूरी कर लेते हैं तो वे उनके लिए वैध हैं।सही मुस्लिम से हदीस, विवाह की पुस्तक, हदीस 3371, ग्रेड: सही अबू सिरमा ने अबू सईद अल खादरी (अल्लाह उससे प्रसन्न) से कहा: 0 अबू सईद, क्या आपने अल्लाह के दूत को अल-अज़ल का उल्लेख करते हुए सुना है? उन्होंने कहा: हाँ, और कहा: हम अल्लाह के दूत के साथ बाहर गए थे? बिल-मुस्तलिक के अभियान पर और कुछ उत्कृष्ट अरब महिलाओं को बंदी बना लिया; और हम ने उन्हें चाहा, क्योंकि हम अपनी पत्नियों के वियोग से पीड़ित थे, (परन्तु साथ ही) हम ने उनके लिये छुड़ौती भी चाही। इसलिए हमने उनके साथ संभोग करने का फैसला किया, लेकिन 'एज़ल' (गर्भाधान से बचने के लिए वीर्य के उत्सर्जन से पहले पुरुष यौन अंग को बाहर निकालना) का पालन करते हुए। लेकिन हमने कहा: हम एक कार्य कर रहे हैं जबकि अल्लाह का दूत हमारे बीच में है; उससे क्यों नहीं पूछा? तो हमने अल्लाह के रसूल से पूछा, और उन्होंने कहा: इससे कोई फर्क नहीं पड़ता कि तुम ऐसा नहीं करते, क्योंकि पुनरुत्थान के दिन तक पैदा होने वाली हर आत्मा पैदा होगी।
50% of What Sai Say, I dont understand...too good.😀😀
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
It is well understood.. there are subtitles for the same reason.. he is super fast express.. he said 20 mins is less.. but with his speed.. he in fact finished in 15 mins..
But myl😢rds have understood, but still they will not agree with Mr. Sai Deepak because simply they don't want to... power, power, power.😂😂😂
Lol 😂very true . Very long story English sentences , vocabulary and points based on LAW. Only lords can understand 😂
That's how lawyers speak my friend.
To all individuals who are commending J Sai Deepak on his command over his english, I will give you something else to commend this man as well, here is what he said:
1. Who Should Decide?
He argues that changing important social norms should be the job of the lawmakers, not the judges. This is because lawmakers involve the public and follow a detailed process to make decisions.
2. Society's Voice:
He believes that society should have a say in big decisions, like changing marriage laws. It’s not just about two people getting married but about how marriage is seen and valued by everyone in society.
3. Balancing Values:
He questions if a democracy should only support liberal views and ignore conservative ones. Society should be able to decide what changes are acceptable and where to draw the line.
4. Proper Procedures:
He points out that there are strict steps to follow when making new laws. This includes consulting different ministries, getting cabinet approval, and the President’s sign-off. Judges shouldn’t bypass this thorough process.
5. Marriage is Social:
Marriage isn't just a private deal between two people; it affects the whole society. Therefore, society should have a say in any changes to marriage laws.
6. Judicial vs. Legislative Roles:
He warns against judges making decisions that should be left to lawmakers, as it can lead to confusion and overstepping of boundaries.
7. International Perspective:
He mentions that international guidelines don’t force countries to change their marriage laws. Each country can decide for itself.
8. Long-Term Impact:
He’s concerned that if judges start making these decisions, it could set a bad precedent for the future, undermining the role of lawmakers. He also thinks we should focus on more immediate issues, like preventing the exploitation of transgender individuals, before making big social changes.
In short, the J Sai Deepak is saying we should let lawmakers handle these big decisions, involve the public in the process, and not let judges overstep their roles.
Seperation of power is basic structure of constitution. Any legislation on any aspect HAS to be done via parliament and not judiciary. Good argument by Sai
He is super brilliant 🤩🤩
Main idea is to break the society into pieces leaving kids vulnerable to vultures. Great going Sai Deepakji
Like in west , this is all arrangements to legalise pedophilia and gift kids to peadophiles.
Jai Sai Deepak 👍 Great Advocate
Stop addressing them as lords😮
Fantastic JSD! Hope better sense prevails on the SC.
Brilliant
Wow iam impressed how this guy maintains his calmness, honour and respect... Truly inspiring.
Excellent argument by J sai Deepak
Sai, you are too good. Doesn’t matter if biased Judiciary closes its’ mind.
Same gender people who interested in marriage might loose human rights. Who are loosing human rights are victims.
Who are victims here? The same gender couples only.
Sai rightly said in podcast that most of the audience following him is actually liking his English😂
Amazed at Sai Deepak's presentation ans speed
Marriage as an institution being individualised is a problem? Since when lol, what social character does marriage have besides that between the individuals? Bullshit