INTRODUCTION
In India’s legal and sociopolitical context, the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is one of the most contentious and delicate topics. All Indian citizens, regardless of caste, religion, or community, would be subject to the same set of civil laws that are being proposed and implemented. Civil laws relating to marriages, divorces, inheritances, adoptions, and maintenance are included in these.
Article 44 of the Indian Constitution’s “Directive Principles of State Policy” serves as the foundation for the concept of a UCC. Even though these principles are not legally binding, the nation’s governance should still consider them. Article 44 states that the State is required to guarantee that every Indian citizen has access to a UCC.
The UCC has been considered to be crucial in advancing the values of justice, equality, as well as national unity. According to them, personal laws on the basis of religion are discriminatory, especially against women, and they believe that codal provisions would uphold the norms of secularism and gender justice enunciated in the Constitution.
But critics are deeply apprehensive over what would follow from forcing a unified civil code on a country whose culture runs so deep and varied as it does. They also say that religious rights would be put on trial under the UCC, disturbing the traditional practices and typical identifications of all minority groups. Uniformity would mean a pluralism that was rich in its antithesis for them, for the Indian society.
This blog will attempt to tackle the question that has been debated continuously: Is the UCC really the step towards modernization and equality, or does it bring risks to the cultivation of our world’s diverse culture and religion?
THE UCC AND ITS CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS
Article 44 of the Constitution reads:
“The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India.”[1]
This was included as an idea to bring to unity and a sense of national citizenship. Yet, as being non-justiciable, it is not capable of being enforced in courts of law like Fundamental Rights. This issue was particularly contentious on the Constituent Assembly itself, given that minorities were concerned about the threat to religious freedom.
Part of legal uniformity, the UCC was also supported by “Dr. B.R. Ambedkar”, who was also aware of the voluntary adoption to prevent alienating the minorities.
CURRENT PERSONAL LAWS IN INDIA
In India, different religious communities have different personal laws.
- Sikhs, Jains, and Buddhists (including Hindus): Under the Hindu Marriage Act, Hindu Succession Act, etc.
- Sharia-based laws such as the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937.
- Christians: Governed by the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, and the Indian Divorce Act, 1869.
- Parsis: Governed by the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936.
Regarding laws that involve marriage and divorce, maintenance, adoption, as well as inheritance, they differ greatly.
ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF UCC
- Gender Justice and Equality
Most of the personal laws are discriminatory against women. For example, polygamous marriages were permitted under Muslim law, while women’s consenting rights over coparcenary property were only acknowledged under Hindu law in 2005. The gender that would enjoy the same rights within the UCC would be that of all the genders, across religions.[2]
- National Integration
It could provide a uniform code that could give a common identity, contribute to fostering the unity of the nation, and eradicate differences on the basis of religious affiliations.[3]
- Legal Clarity and Simplicity
Today, the justice delivery system is bogged down by the confusion that reigns from the presence of several personal laws. The legal process would be streamlined and would relieve the Office of the Judiciary.
- Secularism
India is a secular nation that calls for the State to be paid equally to the citizens on the basis of religion. The acceptance of religious personal laws contradicts the principle of secularism, where the State allows exceptions of faith based ordinances.[4]
ARGUMENTS AGAINST UCC
- Threat to Cultural and Religious Diversity
It is India’s diversity that makes it strong. Tendency to imposition of common code might be equated with majoritarian philosophy, and there can be alienation of minority communities.[5]
- Violation of Religious Freedom (Article 25)
Opponents of UCC claim that it infringes upon the fundamental right to practice and propagate one’s religion, particularly when it comes to laws based on faith.
Case: Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017). Instant triple talaq was struck down by the Union of India (2017) they balancing religious freedom and gender justice.[6]
- Lack of Consensus
Within the same community, there is no agreement as to what should make up the UCC. This is why different Muslim sects or Hindu castes follow different customs.
- Political Instrumentalization
UCC is used as a political tool to politicize voters, say the critics. This was implemented in a top-down way that can result in social unrest and disharmony.
JUDICIAL PERSPECTIVE
Several times, the “Supreme Court of India” has pleaded for the application of UCC.
- “Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985): The Court berated the absence of a UCC and affirmed that secular criminal laws must be allowed to prevail over personal laws when it comes to providing for maintenance.[7]
- “Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995)”: The Court continued to highlight the importance of a UCC to avoid the misuse of the personal laws (i.e., change of religion for polygamy only).[8]
Nevertheless, courts have acknowledged the sensitivities at work and paid closer attention to gradual reform than coercive uniformity.[9]
STATE PRACTICE: THE GOA EXAMPLE
It is often said that Goa has been a successful model of UCC. The Goa Civil Code is also of Portuguese origin, based on the civil code; it is the same for all the Goans, irrespective of religion.
While critics have pointed out the religious exceptions even in the Goa code (like Hindus are allowed bigamy under specified conditions), this makes the code less ‘uniform’ than what is thought.[10]
LAW COMMISSION REPORTS
However, the “21st Law Commission of India (2018)” had concluded that a UCC is neither necessary nor desirable at this stage. Instead, gender justice recommends codifying and reforming personal laws.
It urged diversity not to be erased but celebrated and equality within the communities, not amongst them.[11]
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
There has been renewed interest in UCC on the part of the political and legislative.
- Uttarakhand UCC Bill (2024) – The first UCC bill to be passed in the first Indian state, which is regarding equal inheritance, monogamy, live-in relationship registration, and gender neutral guardianship.[12]
- The Centre has suggested that there would be a nationwide UCC, and the 22nd Law Commission is expecting comments on it from the public.
The Uttarakhand model serves as a pilot, but critics note that it would not take care of the needs of religious minorities or galvanize the diversity of the country.
COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE
- France and Turkey have secular constitutions that have their civil codes in place, overriding religious codes.
- Muslims are allowed parallel systems in Indonesia and Malaysia.
- Quite simply, Israel follows religious courts for marriage and divorce.
- The Indian model of secularism with its hybrid of religious and secular is a challenge peculiar to it.
WAY FORWARD: TOWARDS RECONCILIATION
A nuanced approach to justice will include enacting differentiated enforcement of a code that protects diversity rather than enacting a rigid code.
Ambedkar suggests that citizens may voluntarily enter a secular code.
- Readings of Gender Justice and Gender Law: The gradual reforms in personal laws, such as banning polygamy, gender equality in inheritance, have led to gender justice without backlash.
- Dialogue and Consensus: An inclusive code can be shaped from broad consultations with all the communities.
- Gender-Neutral Laws: Framing civil laws from a rights-based, gender-neutral perspective rather than a religious one.
- Legal Literacy vs Religious Polarization: As far as public discourse, it should revolve more around legal literacy rather than religious polarization.
CONCLUSION
This is not about law, but rather it is about identity, justice, and nationhood, the debate about the UCC. The UCC could be a vital instrument to more durable gender equality and the end of legal uniformity, however, implementation has to be cautious, inclusive, and respectful of India’s plural ethos.
Author(s) Name: Dhruv Vijay (B.S. Anangpuria Institute Of Law)
References:
[1] Constitution of India, article 44
[2] “Flavia Agnes, Law and Gender Inequality: The Politics of Women’s Rights in India (Oxford 1999)”.
[3] R. Dhavan, Uniform Civil Code: A Blueprint for Social Reform (1993).
[4] “Rajeev Bhargava, The Promise of India’s Secular Democracy (OUP, 2010)”.
[5] Asaduddin Owaisi, Speech on UCC Debate, Lok Sabha Debates (New Delhi, 2023)
[6] Shayara Bano v Union of India (2017) 9 SCC 1.
[7] Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, AIR 1985 SC 945
[8] Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India, AIR 1995 SC 1531
[9] “Drishti IAS : Uniform Civil Code (July 20 , 2023): <https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/to-the-point/ttp-constitution-of-india/uniform-civil-code > access on May 5, 2025
[10] Usha Tandon, Personal Laws in Goa: Anomalies and Realities, JILI, 2016.
[11] Law Commission Report No. 267 (2018) – Reform of Family Law.
[12] Uttarakhand UCC Bill, 2024 (Draft and Debates)
