Author: Anshika Bhagat, Student at University of Calcutta
To the Point
The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) proposes one set of civil laws for all citizens, regardless of religion, gender, or caste. It would replace the existing religious personal laws in matters like marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption. It is mentioned in Article 44 of the Constitution under the Directive Principles of State Policy, which means it’s a goal for the government, not enforceable by courts, but legally desirable. UCC is not about religion vs. law, but about creating a uniform legal structure that ensures justice. It has become recurring promise during elections raising questions about its true intension. While its legal backing is clear, critics question the timing and intent behind its political promotion. This article explores whether the UCC is a legal necessity or a political agenda.
Legal Jargon
- Uniform Civil Code (UCC): A proposed common set of laws for all Indians concerning family and personal matters.
- Personal Laws: Laws based on religion, dealing with family matters like marriage and inheritance.
- Article 44: A directive in the Constitution encouraging the state to bring in a UCC.
- Fundamental Rights: Legal rights guaranteed by the Constitution like equality (Article 14) and religious freedom (Article 25).
- Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP): Non-binding guidelines for government policy.
The Proof: Why UCC May Be Legally Needed
1.Ensures Equality- Present personal laws are often unequal, especially towards women. UCC would ensure uniform rights for all, in line with Article 14 (Right to Equality). It will create a single law for valid age, consent, monogamy, and registration of marriage for all communities. Prohibit polygamy, which is allowed under some personal laws (e.g., for Muslims). Equal rights in marriage and divorce for men and women, across communities. UCC will give equal rights and duties to everyone, under the same law.
2. Supports National Unity- A common civil law helps in removing identity-based divisions, supporting national integration. A common civil law across religions and regions can reduce legal confusion, division, and identity-based laws. UCC helps build a sense of shared citizenship, without forcing anyone to give up their faith. It’s not about uniformity of religion, but about uniformity of law in civil matters. Example: Goa already follows a kind of UCC (Portuguese Civil Code), and it works without harming religious freedom.
3. Constitutional Basis- Article 44 clearly encourages the implementation of a UCC. It’s part of the Directive Principles, reflecting the vision of the founding fathers. It’s a Directive Principle, meaning it’s not enforceable, but it’s a goal India has promised to achieve. UCC brings personal laws in line with Articles 14, 15, and 21 (equality, non-discrimination, dignity). It’s about fulfilling a promise made by the Constitution itself.
4. Women’s Rights- Many personal laws are gender-biased for example- Under Muslim law men can divorce unilaterally but women have limited rights. And in Hindu inheritance laws were unequal until amended in 2005. Many personal laws are patriarchal and discriminate against women. UCC would ensure gender justice giving women equal say in marriage, divorce, adoption, and property. It will help prevent child marriage, polygamy, unequal divorce rights, and limited inheritance for women.
5. Reform Area- Gender justice, one law makes easier understanding and fewer legal complications, constitutional harmony (aligns personal laws with Article 14(right to equality) and Article 21(rights to life and personal liberty).
In political context: UCC has become a political issue, often included in election manifestos, especially by right-wing parties who claim it promotes national integration. UCC is often projected as a tool to create “One Nation, One Law” — a call for national unity and legal uniformity. UCC often resurfaces before elections, raising suspicion that it’s more about winning votes than implementing justice. Critics say it is used more for vote-bank politics than actual reform. It appeals to majority voters who support uniformity and progressive voters who want gender-just reforms. But it also polarizes minority voters, making it a divisive tool in electoral politics. Example: UCC was highlighted before the 2024 general elections as a key campaign issue by some political leaders. There is a perception of minorities which says many Muslim and Christian communities view the push for UCC as an attempt to dilute their personal laws and they fear it could lead to majoritarian law under the guise of uniformity. The fear is not with the idea of equality, but with who writes the code and whose values it reflects. No government, regardless of party has seriously attempted to draft and table a detailed UCC bill. Opposition parties often avoid taking a firm stand, fearing backlash from minority vote banks. This creates a deadlock for everyone talks about it, but no one brings a real, inclusive draft to the table.
Abstract: The Real Debate
At its core, the UCC debate is about balancing justice with diversity. On one hand, it promises gender justice and legal uniformity. On the other, it raises fears of religious intrusion, particularly for minority groups. Whether it becomes a progressive legal reform or a tool of political polarization depends on how it’s introduced—with fairness or force.
Supporters argue: UCC will ensure equality before the law (Article 14). It will protect women’s rights, especially in communities where personal laws are unequal. It promotes secularism, by separating religion from law. It will help in nation building as it promotes unity and integrity.
Opponents argue: It could violate religious freedom (Article 25). India is a pluralistic society, and uniformity might suppress minority cultures where one law may not suit all communities. Not all personal laws are codified (e.g., Muslim law), so applying one common law might be unfair if based on majority norms and override religious customs.
Supporters of UCC say it is true secularism that everyone treated the same under law. Opponents argue that pluralism is India’s strength, and legal diversity is part of that secularism. So, UCC becomes a debate on what kind of secularism India wants.
Key Case Laws
Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985)
Shah Bano, a Muslim woman, was divorced and left with no support. She went to court asking for maintenance (financial support). Her husband argued that under muslim personal law he only needed to support her during the period of iddat(about 3 months after divorce) and not beyond that. This case highlighted the clash between religious personal laws and secular criminal law and also created a national debate on UCC and women rights. The Supreme court ruled in favor of Shah Bano and held that Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) applies to all citizens, regardless of religion. This section says that if someone can afford to maintain their wife, but refuses to, the wife has a legal right to claim monthly maintenance. The Court said that even after the iddat period, if the woman is poor and unable to support herself, the husband must continue to pay. The judgment supported the idea that India needs one common civil law for all to protect citizens equally — the essence of the UCC. The public and political backlash to the judgment showed how sensitive and controversial the UCC issue can be.
Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995)
It was concerned with Hindu men converting to Islam to remarry without divorce. Supreme court held that a Hindu marriage continues to exist even after one of the Spouse has converted to Islam. There is no automatic divorce until any of the grounds mentioned in Section 13 of the Hindu marriage ACT. The second marriage of Hindu after his conversion to Islam is void in terms of section 494, IPC and the husband is liable to prosecuted for bigamy. Court also criticized the misuse of personal laws and stressed the urgency of UCC.
Jose Paulo Coutinho v. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira (2019)
This case focused on determining the applicable succession law for a property located in Mumbai, owned by Joaquim Mariano Pereira (JMP), a Goan domiciliary. JMP had bequeathed this property to his youngest daughter, Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira, through a will. The dispute arose over whether the succession of this property should be governed by the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867, as applicable in Goa or the Indian Succession Act, 1925, applicable in the rest of India. Supreme court held that Portuguese civil code, which ensures equal inheritance rights for all heirs, applies to Goan residents even if their property is located outside Goa. Court emphasised the urgency of the Article 44 of the constitution and also criticised the political issue which lacks the will to enact UCC.
Conclusion
The Uniform Civil Code is not just a legal question, but a deeply emotional and political one. Legally, it promotes equality, secularism, and justice. But politically, it can become a divisive issue if not handled with sensitivity and inclusivity. It must come from consensus-building, involving civil society, religious scholars, and women’s rights groups. UCC should be introduced gradually, starting with common minimum standards for marriage, divorce, and inheritance. Its success depends on transparency, education, and respect for diversity. A well-drafted, consultative, and secular UCC could be a historic step forward. But if rushed or framed with bias, it risks becoming a political weapon rather than a legal reform.
FAQs
Is UCC already implemented anywhere in India?
Yes, Goa follows a Uniform Civil Code, inherited from Portuguese law, applicable to all citizens regardless of religion.
Does UCC interfere with religion?
No. It only deals with civil matters like marriage, divorce, and inheritance—not religious beliefs or rituals.
Is UCC anti-minority?
Not necessarily. A neutral and inclusive UCC ensures equal treatment, not suppression. But its framing and intent matter.
Why do some groups oppose it?
They fear the loss of cultural identity or that UCC may reflect majoritarian practices.
What’s the government’s current stance?
The central government and some states have shown intent to draft and implement UCC, but national-level adoption is still under discussion.