India’s highest court declined to legalize same-sex marriages on Tuesday but emphasized that the country has a responsibility to recognize LGBTQ relationships and protect them from discrimination.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has been opposing efforts to legally codify same-sex partnerships for the past five years, ever since the Supreme Court invalidated colonial-era laws that banned gay sex.

Earlier this year, lawyers representing several same-sex couples had urged the court to grant full legal recognition to their relationships. However, the five-member bench ruled that the decision to extend marriage equality should be made by the parliamentary authorities.

Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud stated during the verdict that determining the law on marriage is within the purview of the parliament and state legislatures.

The court’s ruling indicated that the fundamental right to marriage for same-sex couples is not guaranteed by India’s constitution under current legislation. However, it did grant marriage rights to couples where one or both members were transgender, provided that one participant identified as a man and the other as a woman.

Chandrachud added that India still has an obligation to acknowledge same-sex relationships and safeguard those involved from discrimination. He stated, “Our ability to feel love and affection for one another makes us feel human. This court has recognized that equality demands that queer unions and queer persons are not discriminated against.”

The verdict was met with sadness and disappointment by a crowd gathered outside the court who had hoped to celebrate India becoming the second Asian jurisdiction, after Taiwan, to legalize same-sex marriages.

Siddhant Kumar, a 27-year-old in the crowd, expressed dissatisfaction with the court’s decision and emphasized the ongoing struggle for legal recognition.

The petitioners had argued that validating same-sex marriage would enable them to access the legal benefits of matrimony, including adoption, insurance, and inheritance.

However, Modi’s government, which leans towards Hindu nationalism, has consistently opposed same-sex marriage and maintained that any change should come through parliamentary action rather than court decisions.

The government’s submission stated that any interference would disrupt the balance of personal laws in the country and societal values. It argued that same-sex relationships and sexual activity were not compatible with the Indian family unit concept of a husband, a wife, and children.

Siddhant Rai, a 20-year-old among the crowd outside the court, expressed disappointment with the ruling and did not foresee a favorable judgment in the near future under the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

In India, marriage is governed by family laws specific to various religions, such as the Muslim Marriage Act and the Hindu Marriage Act.

A significant ruling in 2018 had already struck down the British colonial-era law criminalizing gay sex. Last year, the court ruled that unmarried partners and same-sex couples were entitled to welfare benefits.

Acceptance of gay couples has been on the rise in India following the 2018 ruling. A June Pew survey suggested that 53 percent of Indian adults supported same-sex marriage, while 43 percent opposed it.

However, leaders from major religions in India, including Hindu, Muslim, Jain, Sikh, and Christian leaders, oppose same-sex unions, with many arguing that marriage is intended for procreation, not recreation.

While over 30 countries allow same-sex marriage, others recognize same-sex civil unions. In Asia, Taiwan became the first to allow gay marriage after a landmark ruling by its Constitutional Court in 2017, and other countries like Vietnam, Thailand, and Nepal have taken steps toward recognizing same-sex partnerships.