Written by Kausar Jahan
The recent passing of the Uttarakhand government’s Uniform Civil Code (UCC) Bill is a significant step towards creating a more equal and unified legal framework. The aim of this move is to provide a common set of laws for marriage, divorce, land, and property, regardless of religious affiliation. It reflects the constitutional vision outlined in Article 44, which emphasises the need for the state’s effort to establish a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.
The roots of the UCC debate stretch back to the colonial period. While criminal laws were codified, personal laws governing various communities remained distinct, creating a complex legal landscape. The British first mooted the idea of a UCC in the 19th century. However, it was not until the 1950s that the Indian government seriously considered the proposal. In 1954, the Law Commission of India was asked to examine the issue and make recommendations. The Law Commission’s report, published in 1955, recommended that a uniform civil code be enacted for all citizens of India. The UCC is mentioned in the Constitution of India under Article 44 of the Directive Principles of State Policy.
Post-independence, attempts were made to reform Hindu laws with the Hindu Code Bill, but the UCC found its place in the Directive Principles of State Policy due to opposition and lack of awareness. Key judicial interventions, such as the Shah Bano case in 1985, highlighted the need for a uniform approach to maintenance, irrespective of religious beliefs. The Sarla Mudgal case reinforced the idea that conversion to another religion does not dissolve existing marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act. The John Vallamattom case emphasised the unconstitutionality of discriminatory sections applicable to non-Hindus.
The UCC is a proposed legislation that seeks to promote unity and coherence among citizens by establishing a single set of laws that treat all citizens equally, irrespective of their religious beliefs. Currently, different communities follow separate laws related to marriage, divorce, and inheritance, which can create disparities and potential inter-community conflicts. The UCC addresses several gender-related issues, including marriage age, live-in relationships, and inheritance, promoting equal treatment of men and women. It would be a commendable step to raise the minimum age for marriage from 18 to 21. By aligning with the broader goal of achieving gender parity, the proposed UCC can contribute to a more equitable and just society.
Moreover, including measures related to population control in the UCC can help tackle demographic challenges faced by the state, contributing to more sustainable population growth. This is particularly important in countries like India, where the population is growing rapidly, leading to several environmental and social challenges. Despite the numerous benefits offered by the UCC, religious communities may oppose it, perceiving it as a violation of their religious rights. Therefore, it’s crucial to address their concerns and foster dialogue to gain support for this landmark legislation. The government must ensure that the UCC does not infringe on the religious rights of any community and that it is implemented in a way that promotes social harmony and unity. However, it is ironic that the UCC code claims to be uniform yet exceptions are being made for tribes in Uttarakhand.
The implementation of a Uniform Civil Code in Uttarakhand is a major step towards creating a more inclusive and fair society. It involves adopting a standardised legal framework that has the potential to serve as a model for other regions to follow, promoting a sense of unity and equality. While there may be challenges to overcome, the benefits of this initiative are numerous, including promoting social harmony, gender equality, and effective population management. The pursuit of this objective is commendable and can contribute to the betterment and advancement of both the state and the nation.
The writer is Chairman, Delhi State Haj committee. Views are personal