UCC a constitutional ambition, no link to religion: Supreme Court

“I have always maintained, and I have told my Muslim friends also that don’t oppose UCC. Many of them oppose the UCC because the fear is that in the name of a UCC, the Hindu civil code will be imposed on them. I have always said the civil laws should always be uniform for all across all religions,” Bhushan told the bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi.

Agreeing with the CJI, Bhushan said, “It’s a constitutional ambition for good reason. Because the civil law should be uniform in a country irrespective of religion.”

Justice Bagchi said, “In fact if you look at the personal law of marriage, the Special Marriage Act is one of the steps towards uniformity in matrimony, that you have an option to opt out from your personal law and solemnise a marriage, as well as the rights of paternity and custody etc under the Special Marriage Act. And now also with the Juvenile Justice Act permitting adoption, you make inroads into the personal law domain.”

“But these have been legislative exercises… will it be appropriate for the court to get into it? Freedom of religion is a part of the fundamental rights,” Justice Bagchi said.

“But if a religious practice is inherently discriminatory or against equity, good conscience, public order, morality etc… even if it’s a religious practice, it has to be struck down. Because once the Constitution comes, it does not permit any practice to be inherently discriminatory unless Your Lordships elevates it to an essential religious practice protected under Article 25,” Bhushan said.

The counsel said inheritance is definitely not an essential religious practice. “Saying women will get half or even less than half compared to their male counterparts is discriminatory. This is a civil case and not an essential religious practice under Article 25,” he said.

Bhushan added that even in cases of testamentary succession, a Muslim cannot make a will for more than 1/3rd of the property, thereby depriving them of control over even self-acquired property. Issuing the notice, the bench tagged the petition with few others which have raised similar questions.