Uniform Civil Code

Change the only constant. Starting with this line has a great relevance in the whole article below. Any scientific development and experiment is the result of a conscious effort. No one can think of any innovation or scientific theories without debate, be it intra personal or among the various contemporary scientists. Along with that, adopting from various knowledge sources and implementing that very knowledge also plays a very important role. 

Similarly at societal level the same goes, and for any developing and forward looking society it is important to have laws which are also ever evolving. Any civilized society can be assessed by the kind of rule that society is following and the struggle among citizens and government regarding demand of any law. In a democracy like us there is a need for debate, discussion and dialogues in order to improve any law in a society. In that respect only, there is a need for Uniform Civil Code- similar code for the people of the whole country instead of all the personal civil laws, this is required in order to bring uniformity in the whole country along with equality among the followers of different religions. It will restrict the practice of unlawful activities which are happening under the smokescreen of ‘moral policing’ under various personal laws. For the same the constituent assembly has given a provision for the uniform civil code in our Constitution.  

                                            Quint 

 What does the Constitution say about it? 

The state "must endeavor to provide for the citizens a uniform civil code across the territory of India," according to Article 44 of Part IV of the Constitution. The founders of the Constitution intended the UCC to be a uniform body of rules that would replace the personal laws of each religion with regard to issues like marriage, divorce, adoption, and inheritance. 

In the Constituent Assembly, there was a lot of discussion regarding whether or not the UCC clause should be included as a fundamental right or guiding principle. By a vote of 5:4, the subcommittee on fundamental rights, chaired by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, ruled that obtaining a UCC did not fall under the purview of fundamental rights.

Then comes the provision of article 25 of the Constitution which talks about everyone is free to follow and practice any religion and as soon as UCC comes into force it will strike down all the personal laws of various religions. The same is supported by one of the members of constituent assembly Naziruddin Ahmad from Bengal argued the same that article 19 (provisional) which later called as article 25 will get violated. 

However, K.M. Munshi, a member, rejected the idea that a UCC would violate the right to freedom of religion because the Constitution permits the government to enact laws that encompass secular activities connected to religion if they are meant to promote a positive social change. He promoted the UCC, citing advantages including fostering national unity and advancing women's equality. According to him, many discriminatory practices of personal law against women could not be ended if personal laws governing inheritance, succession, and other matters were a component of religion. Adding on to it one can say that it also violates article 14 which talks about equality before law along with article 15 which gives provision for no discrimination on the basis of sex, caste, colour, region, religion. These two fundamental rights are getting violated as soon as all the personal laws of the religions are into force.  

                                                    HT

Flaws of different personal laws  

In Hindu Succession Act daughters get equal rights to property only after amendment in 2005 although certain flaws still remain in it. Hindus have a distinct provision governing the inheritance of a woman's property than a man's property. If a woman passes away without any will husband or children, her property will first pass to her husband's heirs, then if her husband and children are both deceased, to her father's heirs, and finally to her mother's heir. It is governed by Mitakshara’s law which is undemocratic in its various provisions.  

In the southern part of India there is a custom in Hindu families too that girls often marries their first cousins and even uncles, in Tamil Nadu about 23.7% of girls marries first cousin of either their mother or father side, 3.5% girls marries their uncles. Similarly there are different customs in all 750 tribes of India among them polygamy and polyandry is very common. With this there may be concerned among some Hindus. 

Similarly a large part of Hindu families (Jain and Sikh families too) have a great concern regarding ant kind of loss they faces in the income tax which they benefits because of Joint Hindu Family business.  

Both in Shia and Sunni Muslim law a woman is given half of the property as compared to that of a male child, if both of them are alive then daughter will get one third whereas the son will get two third of the property.  

Similarly in Christian law provides that a widow will get half of the property as compared to the rest, whereas sons and daughters get equal rights.  

Parsi law was amended in 1991 in order to provide equal property rights to both son and daughter, but if a Parsi woman/daughter gets married with a non-Parsi man then she will not inherit the property although their children will.   

Apart from this even Muslim women don’t have alimony rights before 1986 act, Christian women cannot initiate a divorce on the grounds such as adultery, cruelty, bestiality but husband can with just declaring that she is adulteresses.  

After having a look at all of the provisions it is quite clear that these are highly discriminatory among religions and between sexes.  

Any civilized state with democratic soul will never tolerate this kind of rules and regulations, even though there are provisions in our constitution to have laws in order to implement a common civil code but still they are ignored.  

UCC in a different state? 

Goa is the only state in the country to have UCC which was given by the Portuguese in 1867, along with that different states are thinking of introducing their own Uniform Civil Code. But two questions arise with this fact, firstly whether the state government introduces such laws and second if yes what happens when marriage between the couple of two states one with the UCC and other with not in such cases there comes a serious issue of what will happen in this case.  

Although the Constitution of India has a concurrent list in which subjects like marriage, divorce, custody and total 52 subjects are there so both the Centre and state can form laws in this respect, the issue of non-uniformity will remain if these are formed by different states differently. If this will be passed by parliament then it will be uniform, and this will result in a better UCC implementation.  

 Supreme court’s stand  

Former chief justice of India Sarad Arvind Bobde earlier has focused on UCC. Other than this Supreme court in its various judgements has louds out for the implementation of UCC. In Mohammad Ahmed Khan vs. Shah Bano Begum decision of 1985, when a divorced Muslim lady requested maintenance from her former husband, the supreme court urged for the application of the UCC while debating whether to give precedence to the CrPc or the Muslim personal law. Other judgements like Sarla Mudagl and other V. UOI, Paulo Coutinho vs Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira directly deals with Goa’s civil laws 

Other than that opinion it is not that much necessary to implement UCC apart from that a law commission report named "is neither necessary nor desirable at this stage” in , only amendment regarding discriminatory practices, stereotypes should be introduced regarding each and every personal laws but this will leads a lots of workload on various government institutions and instead that will be a better option to introduce a completely new law with all democratic rights of equality be it gender religion or any other aspect. But the latter option may lead to tussles among religious groups and the government. Although the current law commission has started taking opinions of individuals regarding that and as of now (5th day of July 2023) more than 3 lakh opinions were given. 

Favour and Against 

The main favour which some of the experts give in respect to implementation of Uniform Civil Code is that it will create a scene of equality better say no discrimination among followers of different religions especially women the most vulnerable group of any religion as discussed above. It will ensure gender justice and a better civilized society along with forward looking aspects of every religion. Adding to it there is a notion that Indian secularism is all about accepting flaws and cons of religions and trying to improve it and have a better life ahead (A true sense of democracy). Putting the same into the framework of Constitution of India it will ensure a better implementation of Provisions like article 14,15 of part III of Constitution of India. 

On the other hand, the main argument against UCC is that it will prohibit the expression of religious freedom in article 25 along with article 29 which talks about the right to cultural conservation. In India we have  

Now it’s just up to the readers and legal luminaries that which should prevail the former arguments or the later one. 

Conviction 

As the debate around is at its peak it is obvious that one develops an eye for any topic so I am and this part is all about the conviction I have developed. The first and foremost is over politicisation of this whole thing by the one who favours and vise versa. Political parties should take a principled stand as it isn’t a anti religious reform but for gender neutrality in our society. Tribes and other societies should be considered along with a special attention should be given to the states under sixth schedule under constitution of India(autonomous states to have a special status to protect special feature of the specified area ) which is one of the challenging tasks in this, because preserving the diversity is also important upto the extent it is not disturbing public morality, public order and democratic values. विभिन्नता के नाम पर कुरीतियों को आश्रय देना सरासर गलत है. Preserving the best of each. Beyond that one option is to amend all the provisions in the personal laws which are discriminatory in order to male them democratically fit, this will not only result in minimum frictions among communities and greatest happiness. 

 

                                                   IE

So, from the very fact that law which are followed along with the law-and-order conditions of a country is reflection of the society, as far as India is concerned the largest democracy of the world should take care of these things and in light of that only we have provisions of Uniform Civil Codes in our Constitution. But the grief is that we are still following all those personal laws, be it of any religion which are full of prejudices and discriminatory, although with passes of time and need of hour they have been amended. Considering all those practices in personal laws which are not fit for any modern democracy, the need is to have a civil law which will be uniform like other laws like I.P.C, CrPC and other non-civil laws even the apex laws of all the laws the Constitution of India is uniform throughout the country. This provision is the most ignored provision of the Constitution which till now remains either in manifestos or judicial pronouncement. Some states are trying to frame and implement its own UCC. It is a positive sign but how it will be okay to have a law for uniformity among religions and will not be uniform in our country.