Author: Chhavi Das, ILS Law College
To the Point
The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) debate in India is one of the toughest challenges in the country’s constitutional and socio-political discourse: how to balance legal uniformity with deep rooted cultural diversity. The Directive Principles under Article 44 encourage the State to move towards implementing a Uniform Civil Code across all communities. [(Constitution of India, Article 44)].
But what does that mean? Personal laws govern marriage, inheritance and divorce across religious communities, often based on centuries old customs and religious dogmas [(Law Commission of India, Report No. 277, 2018).
Proponents argue UCC promotes equality, secularism and national integration, however critics contend that it risks undermining religious freedom and minority rights. [(Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India, AIR 1995 SC 1531)]. This article will explore the constitutional basis of UCC, legal complexities and propose a reconciliatory model that balances uniformity and diversity.
Legal Jargon
Article 44 seeks legal equality by aiming for a common civil code [(Constitution of India, Article 44).
Though non-justiciable, it has been a recurring theme in judicial pronouncements [(Shah Bano case, AIR 1985 SC 945).
Courts invoke constitutional morality to uphold equality over religious customs [(Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1).
There is a perpetual tension between Article 25 (freedom of religion) and Articles 14 & 15 (equality and non-discrimination)
Codified personal laws across religious communities make uniformity difficult [(R. Dhavan, “The Problem of the Uniform Civil Code,” in Uniform Civil Code: A Legal and Political Perspective, ICSSR Publication).
In Shah Bano, the judiciary emphasized the need to align personal laws with gender justice and constitutional values.
The Proof
The presence of dual legal systems, common law and community-specific personal laws further intensifies social fragmentation, which further complicates legal coherence.
A Hindu man is punished for bigamy under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, while a Muslim man can marry up to four wives under Sharia [(Hindu Marriage Act, 1955); (Muslim Personal Law – Shariat Application Act, 1937)].
After the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act, daughters were given the same rights in ancestral property as sons, thereby removing gender-based discrimination in inheritance law. Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005)].
Muslim women inherit less under Islamic law [(A. A. Fyzee, Outlines of Muhammadan Law, OUP)].
Divorce procedures vary across communities, often unclear or unfair [(Flavia Agnes, 1999)].
Abstract
Such discrepancies violate Article 14 and often perpetuate patriarchal practices under the guise of cultural preservation.
The Goa Civil Code is often cited as a successful model of UCC [(Government of Goa, Goa Civil Code (Portuguese Civil Code, 1867))], but even this code has exceptions e.g., special provisions for Catholics.
Thus, the question isn’t whether India should have a UCC, but how to design one that protects individual rights while respecting diversity [(Law Commission Report No. 277, 2018)].
The Uniform Civil Code is a contentious issue as it tries to bridge the constitutional promise of equality with the lived realities of India’s diverse society. This article examines how the dual legal system where civil and personal laws coexist often leads to contradictions with the constitutional principle of equality under Article 14. By looking at the disparities in marriage, inheritance and divorce laws across religions, it argues that many personal laws perpetuate gender inequality under the garb of cultural autonomy. Although the UCC is seen as a tool for uniformity and modernity, it also raises fears of majoritarianism. Using Goa’s Civil Code as an illustration, the article argues for a balanced framework, one that integrates secular objectives without undermining India’s rich cultural fabric.
Case Laws
1. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985)
Citation: AIR 1985 SC 945
The above case was more than just a legal judgment. It became a flashpoint that energized the national debate on personal laws and uniformity. The judgment held that secular law prevails in matters of basic rights and that Muslim women can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC despite the religious personal law. It said that statutory rights of dignity and equality should not be compromised by religious practices. It also held that constitutional morality should guide legal reforms and triggered a national debate on the need and relevance of UCC.
2. Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995)
Citation: AIR 1995 SC 1531
The Court dealt with the issue of Hindu men converting to Islam solely to enter into a second marriage without legally dissolving the first, thus bypassing monogamy under Hindu law. The Supreme Court declared such conversions as void of genuine religious intent and an abuse of legal process. Justice Kuldip Singh advocated for UCC saying that absence of uniform civil law framework leads to conflict, misuse and inequality across personal laws.
3. John Vallamattom v. Union of India (2003)
Citation: (2003) 6 SCC 611
This case challenged the constitutional validity of Section 118 of the Indian Succession Act which restricted Christians from bequeathing property for religious or charitable purposes. The Supreme Court struck down the provision as discriminatory under Article 14 and held that personal laws must align with the equality principle in the Constitution. It strengthened the argument that personal laws should not infringe upon individual rights solely on the basis of religion.
4. Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017)
Citation: (2017) 9 SCC 1
In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court by 3:2 majority declared talaq-e-biddat (instant triple talaq) as unconstitutional. The judgment held that practices violating fundamental rights especially the right to equality and dignity cannot be protected under the garb of religious freedom. Although the judgment did not directly relate to Uniform Civil Code, it emphasized the need for reform in personal laws especially to promote a legal system based on gender equality and constitutional rights.
Conclusion
A conclusion about the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) and India’s many cultures shows that the debate does not simply pit sameness against variety – it is a path to balance legal fairness with many different cultures. Current personal laws often continue unfairness, especially for women and groups who do not have much power. A one-size-fits-all legal approach is unlikely to do justice to the pluralistic nature of Indian society. The implementation of the UCC in India should be progressive, inclusive, and carried out in careful stages. This code should have its basis in what the constitution considers right.
Rather than being imposed all at once, the UCC could be structured in parts, allowing space for dialogue, adaptation, and acceptance. That framework allows a slow joining of laws plus it respects cultural independence. It also makes sure women receive fair treatment and that laws apply equally to all. This approach must distinguish civil law reforms from religious identity politics, focusing instead on legal clarity, social harmony, and constitutional values rather than enforcing sameness.
A better reform of personal laws comes about through several steps. The community takes part in writing down and slowly changing personal laws. All religious codes need adjustments that are fair to women. A measured way to integrate laws should follow, with talks among groups over time. Spreading awareness and teaching the basics of law helps bridge the gap between legal systems and everyday citizens.
In a country with many cultures, the Uniform Civil Code works only if people adopt it with care, include everyone along with base it on fairness. The intent is not to have everything alike. The intention is to ensure that personal freedoms, legal duties, and civil rights are in sync with one another. This creates a legal structure where people keep their differences, but the constitution treats everyone equally.
FAQS
1. What is the Uniform Civil Code (UCC)?
The Uniform Civil Code consists of secular laws that apply to personal matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance along with adoption – these laws govern all religious groups in India in the same way. The code seeks to advance legal equality and national unity – it replaces religious personal laws with one civil system.
2. Does the constitution require India to implement the UCC?
According to Article 44, the Uniform Civil Code is a directive principle, thus not enforceable by courts, but intended to guide legislative action. They serve as goals the State works toward, especially when it seeks legal sameness in personal laws.
3. Does implementing the UCC go against minority rights in India?
Not by nature. The UCC seeks legal sameness, but it needs careful balancing with Articles 25 to 28. These articles protect religious freedom. If the UCC gets put in place in an inclusive way, respecting India’s many cultures, it can stand beside cultural and religious differences. This advances equality and fairness.
4. Does the UCC go against religious freedom under Article 25?
Article 25 protects the right to practice religion. But this right does not come without limits. Public order, morality as well as health constrain it. The secular parts of religion, like marriage, inheritance in addition to divorce, face legislative change. The Supreme Court has stated that personal laws can fit with constitutional principles – this does not go against religious freedom.
5. Why is there resistance to the UCC?
Resistance arises from:
Fears of majoritarian dominance, where minority customs may be sidelined.
Loss of cultural identity, since personal laws are often tied to tradition and community autonomy.
Political mistrust, especially when the UCC is introduced without broad consultation.
Lack of representation, making communities feel alienated from the lawmaking process.
This can be addressed by ensuring inclusive dialogue, gradual implementation, and constitutional safeguards for minority identities.
6. Can India adopt a UCC without compromising its multicultural identity?
Yes. A phased, flexible, and participatory UCC which is rooted in constitutional values like gender justice and dignity and can harmonize legal uniformity with cultural pluralism. Goa’s Civil Code and progressive court rulings show that diversity and equality can be reconciled within a common civil framework.
7. What is the Goa Civil Code and how is it relevant to the UCC debate?
The Goa Civil Code, also known as the Portuguese Civil Code, is India’s only example of a common civil law system applicable to all communities. While often cited as a model for the UCC, it still allows some religious-specific exceptions such as for Catholics. This indicates that a truly uniform code can still accommodate cultural nuances, offering a potential blueprint for national reform.
