GENERAL OVERVIEW OF UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

 TOPIC :- GENERAL OVERVIEW OF UNIFORM CIVIL CODE 

Introduction

India stands as the largest democracy in the world, exerting a significant cultural influence across various domains, supported by a robust military and one of the fastest-growing economies. The country operates under a federal political system that empowers its citizens, distributing authority between the central and state governments. Its rich diversity encompasses numerous religious identities, languages, and cultural values, with religion serving as a fundamental aspect of life for many individuals.

Moreover, India is recognized as a secular nation, which signifies that it does not endorse any specific religion or customs, ensuring that individuals are not discriminated against based on their religious beliefs. The state operates independently of any particular religion or religious organization when making decisions. This principle ensures that the state does not interfere in religious matters, nor do religious issues influence the functioning of the state. These rights are enshrined In Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution as fundamental rights. However, challenges arise due to the lack of uniformity in personal laws.

The absence of a standardized approach to personal laws leads to each community maintaining its own customs, practices, and beliefs, which can create conflicts with other communities. Personal laws often encounter difficulties in matters related to succession, marriage, divorce, inheritance, adoption, maintenance, and guardianship.

Definition

In the Constitution of India, the Uniform Civil Code is referenced in Article 44, which encompasses all areas of law except for matrimonial laws. The term Uniform Civil Code signifies one nation, one law. The Civil Code refers to the comprehensive set of laws that govern rights related to property and other personal matters such as marriage, divorce, maintenance, adoption, and inheritance.

Article 44 of the Indian Constitution states that the State shall strive to ensure a uniform civil code for all citizens across the territory, which presents an ambiguous directive under Article 44 (formerly Article 35 in the Draft Constitution).

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar advocated for the UCC; however, due to resistance from opposing parties, the UCC was relegated to the status of a directive principle. During the 1980s, secularism emerged as a significant issue in India, yet the UCC became one of the most contentious topics in contemporary politics, particularly following the Shah Bano case in 1985. Personal laws were primarily established for Hindu and Muslim citizens.

Uniform Civil Code and Constituent Assembly

Since India gained Independence in 1947, the introduction of the UCC has been a topic of debate, with discussions in the Indian Parliament beginning in 1948. Muslim fundamentalists like Poker Saheb, along with members from other faiths, expressed strong opposition to it. Nevertheless, it received support from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the Father of our Constitution and Chairman of the Draft Committee, as well as from notable journalists such as K.M. Munshiji, Alladi KrishnaSwamy Ayer, and G.S. Iyengar.

Initially, the UCC was included in Article 35 of the Draft Constitution. There was a push to amend Article 35 to allow for the enactment of the UCC when necessary, while keeping personal laws excluded from it. The UCC was viewed as a challenge to the religious freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.

Despite this, numerous arguments were presented in favor of the UCC. K.M. Munshi articulated a strong perspective against the notion of majority dominance over minorities. He argued: It is incorrect to label such legislation as the autocracy of the majority. If we examine countries in Europe that have a civil code, it is evident that everyone, including minorities, must adhere to that civil code when they are there.

Uniform Civil Code and Personal Laws

India has been a patriarchal society since ancient times, where women have consistently been viewed as inferior to men according to personal laws. This perception extends to discussions regarding succession, marriage, inheritance, and adoption.

In the context of Muslim law, women held a subordinate status in Pre-Islamic Arabia. Under Islamic law, a woman is prohibited from marrying four times; if she does, she is deemed impure, while men are permitted to marry four times.

Women are not granted the right to divorce their husbands, and the practice of a husband pronouncing triple Talak to divorce his wife is particularly discriminatory. The Allahabad High Court recently ruled this practice void and unlawful. Furthermore, a Muslim wife is not entitled to maintenance beyond the Iddat period.

Secularism and Uniform Civil Code

The preamble of the Indian Constitution declares that India is a secular nation. This implies that individuals cannot face discrimination based on their religion from the secular state. Justice Jeevan Reddy, in the case of S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, stated that religion pertains to personal faith and belief, which should not be intertwined with secular matters and can be governed by the State through legislation.

The Preamble of the Indian Constitution aims to establish a “Secular, Democratic and Republic”. Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution ensure the freedom of religion and the right to manage religious affairs, while Article 44, which is not legally enforceable, expresses the state’s commitment to achieving a Uniform Civil Code in India.

UCC and Goa

In India, Goa stands out as the sole state that has implemented a Uniform Civil Code, regardless of the religion, caste, or culture of its residents. This code ensures consistency in Family law. In Goa, all communities, including Hindus, Muslims, and Christians, are subject to the same regulations concerning inheritance, divorce, marriage, and succession. When Goa became part of the Union Territory under The Goa Daman and Diu Administration Act of 1962, the Parliament authorized the application of the Portuguese civil code of 1867 to Goa, which is subject to amendments and repeals by the appropriate legislative body.

The Requirement for a Uniform Civil Code

India is a nation characterized by a rich tapestry of languages and religions. The ancient Indian legal framework governs both Hindus and Muslims. The predominant segment of the population comprises Hindus, and to address their matrimonial issues, the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 was established. This legislation codified and revised the marriage laws applicable to Hindus. A key provision of this act is the requirement for ceremonial marriage and mandatory registration for all. It also addresses matters of maintenance and divorce. The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act of 1956 established regulations concerning guardianship and minority rights. Additionally, the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956 outlines the legal process for Hindu adults wishing to adopt a child. 

In addition to the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, the Indian Parliament enacted the Special Marriage Act of 1954, which facilitates inter-religious marriages, allowing individuals from different faiths to marry through registration. Under this act, marriage registration is compulsory, and couples may also seek divorce. 

To address marriage and divorce issues within the Parsi community, the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act of 1936 was introduced, with amendments made in 1988. The Christian Marriage Act of 1872 was enacted to standardize marriage practices among Christians, while the Divorce Act of 1869, amended in 2001, addresses divorce and related matrimonial issues for Christians. For the Muslim community, several laws have been established, including the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act of 1939, the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937, and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act of 1986. 

The Supreme Court of India, in the case of Seema v. Ashwani Kumar, mandated that all states in India formulate regulations for the compulsory registration of marriages, regardless of religious affiliation, within a specified timeframe.

The issue with Muslim law arises from the existence of additional courts. In the case of Vishwa Lochan Madan v. Union of India and others, the Supreme Court of India issued notices to the Central government, State government, All India Muslim Personal Law Board, and Darul Uloom, an Islamic seminary, regarding the presence of parallel Islamic and Sharia Courts in the country, which poses a challenge to the Indian Judicial System.

Muslim law stipulates the provision of Mehr, which is a sum agreed upon at the time of marriage and serves as consideration for the marriage's execution. However, under Muslim law, a wife is not entitled to maintenance. The Mehr amount provided at marriage is intended to address this issue. Men are not permitted to waive or diminish the Mehr; only the wife has that right. This ensures the protection of women’s interests in the Mehr. Nevertheless, other aspects of Muslim law continue to discriminate against women.

Uniform Civil Code – Legal Perspective

Article 44 of the Indian Constitution mandates that the state must ensure a Uniform Civil Code for all citizens across India. A significant case, Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano, also known as the Shah Bano case, reintroduced the topic of the UCC. In this instance, the Supreme Court included a divorced Muslim woman under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, ruling that she was entitled to maintenance even after her Iddat period had ended.

The Supreme Court remarked that: Section 125 was designed to offer a swift remedy to individuals who are unable to support themselves. The criteria for the applicability of section 125 were based on whether a person could not maintain themselves and whether another person had the means to provide for them.

In the case of State of Bombay v. Narasu Appa Mali, the Bombay High Court was tasked with assessing the constitutional validity of the Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriage Act, 1946. Two main arguments were presented, claiming it violated Articles 14 and 15. The contention arose from the fact that while bigamy is prohibited among Hindus, Muslims are permitted to marry multiple times, leading to a religiously based discrimination. These issues have emerged due to the lack of a common civil code.

In the case of Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India, the Supreme Court underscored the necessity of a UCC concerning matters of inheritance, succession, marriage, and more. In this case, the husband converted to Islam and subsequently married another woman. The court determined that the first marriage remained valid, and the husband was guilty of bigamy. The court noted that bigamy under Muslim Personal Laws contradicts the regulations governing other communities and should be regulated by a Uniform Civil Code.

Conclusion

India is an extensive country characterized by its religious, geographical, linguistic, cultural, and traditional diversity. The architects of the Constitution did not aim for complete legal uniformity; instead, they placed the Uniform Civil Code under the Directive Principles of State Policy rather than under Fundamental Rights. As stated in Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution, every citizen enjoys the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate their religion, along with the autonomy to manage their religious affairs. Article 44 of the Constitution does not mandate that the Uniform Civil Code be enforced on every citizen by abolishing their personal laws. Rather, it suggests that individuals should willingly agree to be governed by the Uniform Civil Code once it is enacted, rather than having it imposed upon them.

Closing Credits

Author: Neha Kalyan

"The views expressed are personal. This article is intended for educational purposes

and public discourse. Feedback and constructive criticism are welcome!"