UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

The concept of Uniform Civil Code is not new. It is a concept which focuses on the application of a common code to all communities notwithstanding their religion, race, caste etc. It is a matter which has been long debated since it specifies its mention under Article 44 of Indian Constitution under the chapter of Directive Principles of State Policy that – ‘the state shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India’. The objective of this principle addresses the discrimination against vulnerable groups and seeks to harmonize diverse cultural practices. It is a directive principle of state policy, not mandatory but a directive towards a desirable end. If this concept is implemented in future it will unite the communities politically, socially and organically.

In common parlance, uniform civil code generally deals with that part of law which deals with family affairs of an individual irrespective of their faith. Laws relating to crime, commerce, contracts etc. are uniform throughout the country. But laws relating to marriage, divorce, inheritance and adoption etc. are guided by the customs and practices of the respective community.

The Preamble of the Constitution is the essence of the constitution and aims to constitute India as Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic and Republic. Therefore, it is the duty of the state to secure for its citizen’s justice, liberty and equality thereby promoting fraternity while assuring dignity of the individual and unity and integrity of the nation. Implementation of UCC in letter and spirit will ensure the ideas mentioned in the Preamble to become a reality.

A Brief Historical Background:

The debate for a common code dates back to the colonial period in India. The Lex loci report of October 1840 emphasized the importance and necessity of uniformity in codification of laws relating to civil and criminal law but it recommended that personal laws of the Hindus and Muslims should be kept outside such codification as these issues were deeply interwoven with the religious tenets of that particular community.

Throughout the country there was variation in customary laws even inside religion. The customs relating to marriage differed among different castes in Hindu religion. Similarly, application of Sharia law was not strictly enforced across many parts of the country. This led to more regional customary laws and created impediment for a common code. Due to prevalent customs, the condition especially that of Hindu widows and daughters was unjust and poor.

During the religious reform movement in India, revolutionaries like Ishwar Chand Vidyasagar, Raja Ram Mohan Roy among others were instrumental in weeding out such customs and practices in Hindu religion. Similarly, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was instrumental in bringing change in the personal laws applicable to Muslims.

The Debate in Constituent Assembly:

The question relating to uniform civil code was raised in the Constituent Assembly. It consisted both types of people; those who wanted to reform the society by implementing it like Nehru, Ambedkar etc. and other were Muslim representatives who perpetuate Muslim law. As a result, it led to the compromise of it being added to the Directive Principle of State Policy. The codification of personal laws has historically generated protests. The Hindu Code, one of the foremost pieces of social legislation had triggered massive opposition. There was a heated and emotive debate in the Parliament over this piece of legislation. Later on, the diluted form of Hindu Code Bill was passed in the form of Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Hindu Successions Act 1956, The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act 1956 and The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956.

What has the Supreme Court said?

The Supreme Court over the years has reiterated many times the need for a uniform civil code and asked the State to implement the same so as to remove gender inequality and abolish the unfair practices followed under the framework of personal laws.

Some very famous cases in this context are the following:

· Mohammad Ahmed khan v. Shah Bano case:

In this case, the victim Shah Bano claimed maintenance from her husband under Section 125 of The Code of Criminal Procedure after she was given talaq. The Supreme Court gave verdict in favour of Shah Bano by applying Section 125 of The Code of Criminal Procedure and said that it is applied to all citizens irrespective of their faith. Then Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud observed that a common civil code would help the cause of national integration by removing disparate loyalties to law. And so, the court directed Parliament to frame a common civil code.

· John Vallamattom v. Union of India Case:

The Priest from Kerala, John Vallamatton filed a writ petition in the year 1997 stating that Section 118 of the Indian Succession Act was discriminatory against the Christians as it imposes unreasonable restrictions on their donation of property for religious or charitable purpose by will. The court struck down the Section declaring it to be unconstitutional. Further Justice Khare stated that; “Article 44 provides that the State shall endeavour to secure for all citizens a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India. It is a matter of great regrets that Article 44 of the Constitution has not been given effect to. Parliament is still to step in for framing a common civil code in the country. A Common Civil Code will help the cause of national integration by removing the contradictions based on ideologies”.

· Sarla Mudgal vs. Union of India case:

The Supreme Court has directed the Prime Minister to take fresh look at Article 44 of the Constitution which says that the state to secure a uniform civil code which accordingly to the court is imperative for both protection of the oppressed and promotion of national unity and integrity.

Conclusion:

The Law Commission of India in its consultation paper chose codification of personal laws over the common code as a way to end discrimination within religions. Law commission has stated that Uniform Civil Code is ‘neither necessary nor desirable at this stage in the country’. It said a unified nation does not necessarily need to have uniformity. We know that there is an urgent need to reform our society which is full of inequality, discrimination and other things which conflict over our fundamental rights but for the time being we have to respect the observations made by the Law Commission and try to be more tolerant and celebrate our diversity altogether.