UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

A PROJECT ON

UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

SUBJECT: FAMILY LAW -I

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, PATNA

SUBMITTED TO: PROF. SHAIWAL SATYARTHI

SUBMITTED BY: PRANAV RANJAN

ROLL NO. – 437 ,3RD

SEM.

1
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I feel myself highly delighted, as it gives me incredible pleasure to present a

research paper on “UNIFORM CIVIL CODE”.

I would like to enlighten my readers regarding this topic and I hope I have
tried my best to pave the way for bringing more luminosity to this topic.

I am grateful to my faculty “PROF. SHAIWAL SATYARTHI” who has given me an

idea and encourage me to venture this project. I would like to thank
librarian of CNLU for their interest in providing me a good back up material.

At finally yet importantly I would like to thank my parents for

INCOMMENSURABLE support.

2
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES:

The aim of the project is to present a detailed study of “ UNIFORM CIVIL CODE” in relation to
FAMILY LAW.

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS:

Though this is an immense project and pages can be written over the topic but because of
certain restrictions and limitations I was not able to deal with the topic in great detail.

SOURCES OF DATA:

The following secondary sources of data have been used in the project-

1. Articles
2. Books
3. Websites

METHOD OF WRITING:

The method of writing followed in the course of this research paper is primarily analytical.

METHOD OF RESEARCH:

The research work of this project is based on doctrinal method.

MODE OF CITATION:

The researcher has followed a uniform mode of citation throughout the course of this
research paper.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
3
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

LIST OF CASES

CHAPTERS:

1. INTRODUCTION-----------------------------------------------------Pg. 6-7.

2. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS ---------------------------------Pg. 8-14.

3. NEED OF UNIFORM CIVIL CODE -------------------------------Pg. 15-21.

4. CODIFICATION------------------------------------------------------Pg. 22-25.

5. CONCLUSION -------------------------------------------------------Pg. 26-27.

APPENDICES:

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LIST OF CASES

4
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

1. Danial Latifi v. Union of India AIR 2001 SC 3262.

2. S.P. Mittal vs. Union of India AIR 1983 SC 1.

3. Moh. Ahmed Khan vs. Shah Bano Begum AIR 1985 SC 945.

4. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) SCC 1.

5. John Vallamattom v. Union of India AIR 2003 SC 2902.

6. A. J. Avadhut v. Commissioner of Police, Calcutta (1984) 4 SCC 522.

7. Aruna Roy v. Union of India AIR 2003 SC 3176.

8. Pannalal Bansilal v. State of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1996 SC 1023.

9. Maharishi Avadhesh v. Union of India 1994 SCC (1) 713.

10. Ahmedabad Women Action Group v. Union of India AIR 1997, 3 SCC 573.

11. Pragati Varghese v. Cyril George Varghese AIR 1997 Bom 349.

INTRODUCTION

5
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

When India attained independence and the issue of Uniform Civil Code (UCC) arose, much
was debated at the Indian Parliament in 1948 as immediately after the independence riots in
the name of religion began especially between Hindus and Muslims. While the founding
father of our constitution and Chairman of the Constitution Draft Committee, Dr. B.R.
Ambedkar, supported by eminent nationalists like Gopal Swamy Iyenger, Anantasayam
Iyengar, KM Munshiji, Alladi Krishnaswamy Iyer and others favoured the
implementation of the Uniform Civil Code; it was strongly opposed by Muslim
fundamentalists like Poker Saheb and members from other religions.

On 23rd November 1948 a Muslim member, in Parliament, gave an open challenge that
India would never be the same again if it tried to bring in Uniform Civil Code and interfere
with Muslim personal law. Earlier, the Congress had given an assurance that it would allow
Muslims to practice Islamic personal Law and the architects of the Constitution, therefore,
found a compromise by including the enactment of a Uniform Civil Code under the Directive
Principles of State Policy in Article - 44. Distinguished members like Shri Minoo Masani,
Smt. Hansa Mehta and Rajkumari Amrit Kaur put in a note of dissent saying that one of
the factors that kept India back from advancing to nationhood has been existence of personal
laws, based on religion, which keep the Nation divided into watertight compartments in many
aspects of life. They were strongly in favour of the view that Uniform Civil Code should be
guaranteed to the Indian people within a period of five to ten years. But even after sixty-one
years, because of perverse secularism and perverted communalism, Uniform Civil Code has
not come into being.

PRESENT SCENARIO

Uniform civil code of India is a term referring to the concept of dominant Civil Law Code in
India. A uniform civil code administers the same set of secular civil laws to govern all people
irrespective of their religion, caste and tribe. This supersedes the right of citizens to be
governed under different personal laws based on their religion or caste or tribe. Such codes
are in place in most modern nations.

In a layman term uniform means same, civil means ordinary citizen and code means set of
rules or principles or laws. So it means that same set of rules applicable to all citizens,
irrespective of religion.

India, i.e, Bharat from it’s very beginning is the land of ‘sarva dharma sambhava’ ,
land of diversity having various religious communities residing at a same place like Hindu,
Muslim, Jain, Christian, Buddhists, Parsees, and Sikhs. The important features of this nation
is unity in diversity and also each community has its own laws governing marriage and
divorce, infants and minors, adoption, wills, intestacy, and succession.

6
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

These personal laws go with an individual across the states of India where they are part of the
law of land, and the individual is entitled to have that individual's own personal law applied
and not the law which would be applied in the local territory.

This term is used in India as a directive principle of state policy. It is described in Part IV of
the Indian Constitution. Article 44 of the Indian Constitution states that the state shall
endeavour to secure for citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India and
also it is provided that uniform law for all persons may be desirable, but it’s enactment in one
go may be counter-productive to the unity of nation.1 The term ‘civil code’ as stated above is
used to cover the entire body of laws governing rights relating to property and personal
matters such as marriage, divorce, maintenance, adoption and inheritance.

The object is to bring national integration by removing or eliminating all the differences of
ideologies. It aims to bring all communities on a common platform on matters which are
currently governed by diverse personal laws. This article focuses on the status of the
implementation of a Uniform Civil Code and the steps taken and directed to be taken by the
Legislature and Judiciary in this regard.

In India the only state where the uniform civil code is applicable is Goa. But it was not easy
for the state to implement it as it is uniform to all religious communities, because some of it’s
provision goes in contradiction to the personal laws.2

FACTORS AFFECTING UCC

The mere three words and the nation break into depth of non-integration and lack of unity.
These three words are enough to divide the nation into two categories - politically, socially
and religiously. Politically, the nation is divided as BJP, which propagates implementation of
the Uniform Civil Code and the non BJP including the Congress party, Samajwadi party, who
are against the implementation of the UCC. Socially, the intelligentsia of the country, who
analyse logically the pros and cons of the UCC and the illiterate who have no opinion of their
own and succumb to the political pressure are at opposite poles. And, religiously, there is a
dangerous widening schism between the majority Hindus and the minority community mostly
the Muslims.

1
Bakshi P.M., The Constitution of India, 9th edn., Delhi, Universal Law Publishing co.,2009.

2
articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com.

7
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

No one in our country, our political leaders or individuals, have ever concentrated their
efforts towards defining the Uniform Civil Code. All we know is that some common law
covering issues relating to marriage, succession and property is called Uniform Civil Code
but what these laws would be is anyone’s guess. Now, what does our Constitution say about
Uniform Civil Code. In Article 44, our constitution clearly specifies the UCC: "The State
shall endeavour to secure the citizen a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of
India".3 The constitution is thus, very clear that unless a uniform civil code is followed,
integration cannot be imbibed. However, the fact is that it is only a “directives principle” laid
down in the constitution.

The Directive Principles of state policy contained in Part IV of the Constitution set out the
aims and objectives to be taken up by the states in the governance of the country. Unlike the
fundamental rights, these rights are not justiciable. If the state is unable to implement any
provisions of Part IV, no action can be brought against the state in a law court. The idea of
uniform civil code envisaged in our constitution can only be achieved if the state attempts to
implement them with high sense of moral duty.

Article 37 of the Constitution itself makes clear that, the directive principles “shall not
be enforceable by any court”4. Nevertheless, they are “fundamental in the governance of the
country”. This shows that although our constitution itself believes that a Uniform Civil Code
should be implemented in some manner, it does not make this implementation mandatory.
Hence, the debate on having a uniform civil code for India still continues. The demand for a
uniform civil code essentially means having one set of laws that will apply to all citizens of
India irrespective of their religion. Though the exact contours of such a uniform code have
not been spelt out, it should presumably incorporate the most modern and progressive aspects
of all existing personal laws while discarding those which are retrograde.

Article 14 of the Indian Constitution declares that “the state shall not deny to any
person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory of
India”.5 Thus Article 14 uses two expressions “equality of laws” and “equal protection of
law”. The phrase “equality of law” finds a place in almost all written constitutions that
guarantees fundamental rights. While “equal protection of the law” is a more positive concept
implying equality of treatment in equal circumstances. However, one dominant idea common
to both the expressions is that of equal justice. But it also talks about reasonable
classifications as the classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which
distinguishes persons or thing that are grouped together from others left out of the group and
the differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the act.

3
Bakshi P.M., The Constitution of India, 9th edn., Delhi, Universal Law Publishing co.,2009.
4
ibid.
5
ibid.

8
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

In Danial Latifi v. Union of India,6 the validity of section 3 and 4 of the Muslim Women
{Protection of Rights on Divorce} Act, 1986 was challenged on the ground that it is violation
of Art. 14 of the Constitution. Under these sections a Muslim divorced woman has right to
claim maintenance from her husband even after the period of iddat. The supreme court held
that the 1986 act is valid and is not violation of Art. 14 of the Constitution. The court held
that, (a) a Muslim husband is liable to make reasonable and fair provision for the future of the
divorced wife extending beyond the iddat period in terms of s. 3(1)(a) of the 1986 act and (b)
not only this but if a Muslim woman remains unmarried and is not able to maintain herself
after iddat period she can proceed under s. 4 of the act against her relatives who are liable to
maintain her in proportion to the properties which they may inherit on her death according to
Muslim law. If the relatives are found unable to pay her maintenance, the magistrate may
direct the State Wakf Board, established under the Wakf act, to pay such maintenance.

Article 15 of the Constitution prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race,

caste, sex or place of birth. The first clause of Article 15 directs the state not to discriminate
against a citizen on grounds only on religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth or any of them.
The word ‘discrimination’ means an adverse distinction or to distinguish unfavourable from
others. If a law makes discrimination on any of the ground it can be declared invalid. It is to
be noted that while clause (1) of Article 15 prohibits discrimination by the state; (2) prohibits
both the state and the private individuals from making any discrimination. The object of
Article 15(2) is to eradicate the abuse of the Hindu social system and to herald a united
nation.

The Constitution itself gives protection to the different religions and religious groups by
including religious rights as fundamental rights.

Under Article 25(1), guarantees to every person the freedom of conscience and right to
profess, practice and propagate religion. The right guaranteed under Article 25(1) like other
constitutional rights, is not absolute. This right is, subject to public order, morality and health
and to the other provisions of Part III of the constitution. Also under sub-clause (a) and (b)
of clause (2) of Article 25 the state is empowered by law to regulate or restrict any economic,
financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;
and to provide for (i) social welfare and reform, and (ii) to throw open Hindu religious
institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindu.

In S.P. Mittal vs. Union of India7 the Majority in this case taking a very restricted view of
religion held that the teachings of Sri Aurobindo constituted a philosophy and not religion
even if their followers claimed them to be their religion. Chinnappa Reddy, J ; In a dissenting
opinion said " the question is not whether Sri Aurobindo refused to claim or denied that he
was founding a new religion or a new school of religious thought but whether his disciples
and community thought so because religion is a matter of belief and doctrine, concerning the
human spirit, expressed overtly in the form of ritual and worship and since Aurobindo's
disciples took Aurobindo's teachings in that spirit the teachings constituted a distinct religion.

UNIFORM CIVIL CODE FOR THE CITIZENS

6
AIR 2001 SC 3262.
7
AIR 1983 SC 1.

9
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

Article 44 talks about a Uniform Civil Code for the citizens, “ the state shall endeavour to
secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India”.

On the one hand we have Article 25, which gives the liberty to all to profess and propagate
their religion. The state will not glorify any particular religion.

On the other hand Article- 44  though a directive principle but fundamental in the governance
of the country talks of a uniform civil code which can infringe the freedom of religion as
guaranteed under Article 25 and it can act tyrannical to the minorities. The state is trying to
play a dual role here. At one point of time it says that the state will not propagate any
particular religion and in the second it is amassing the role of religion itself. The state is
indulging itself into a sabotage to repress and suppress the minority right and religion. This
is what was done in Moh. Ahmed Khan vs. Shah Bano Begum 8 whereby Chief Justice
Chandrachud echoed his misapprehension about Islam. He said that “ the fatal point in Islam
is the degradation of women. And to make things worse he declared that the actual and final
solution of the problem he was tackling lay in the immediate enactment of a uniform civil
code”. If a civil code means total abolition of the Islamic personal law and imposition on
unwilling Muslims of a wholly un-Islamic legal culture the Muslims cannot but forcefully
resist such a socio-cultural upheaval. The fact that a Uniform Civil Code is being demanded
by individuals and organizations known for their prejudices against Muslims and other
minorities has fully exposed the clandestine objects behind the advocacy for such a code and
thus caused a grave and irreparable damage to its cause. In a multi-dimensional country such
as ours just as the mythology of the majority community cannot be accepted by the minorities
as "national history", the personal law of the majority, or even a law imported from the west
and made theoretically applicable to it, cannot be imposed on the minorities as the family law
of India.9

Under Article 26, which says that, subject to public order, morality, and health every
religious denomination of every section of it shall have the following right,
(a) To establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes,
(b) To manage its own religious affairs in matter of religion,
(c) To own and acquire movable and immovable property,
(d) To administer such property in accordance with law.

Under Article 27, it provides that no person shall be compelled to pay any tax for the
promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religious denomination. This article
emphasises the secular character of the state. The public money collected in the way of tax
cannot be spend by the state for the promotion of any particular religion.10

Under Article 28, freedom as to attend religious instruction or religious worship in certain
educational institutions.

8
AIR 1985 SC 945.

9
Ratnaparkhi M.S., Uniform civil code, 3rd edn., Atlantic Publication, 1997, pg.234.

10
Basu D.D., Shorter Constitution of India, Nagpur, Wadhwa, 2009.

10
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

(1) No religion instruction shall be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained
out of State funds.

(2) Nothing in clause (1) shall apply to an educational institution which is administered by
the State but has been established under any endowment or trust which requires that religious
instruction shall be imparted in such institution.

(3) No person attending any educational institution recognised by the State or receiving aid
out of State funds shall be required to take part in any religious instruction that may be
imparted in such institution or to attend any religious worship that may be conducted in such
institution or in any premises attached thereto unless such person or, if such person is a
minor, his guardian has given his consent thereto cultural and educational rights.

Four types of educational institutions were mentioned,

(a) Institution wholly maintained by the state,
(b) Institution recognised by the state,
(c) Institution that are receiving aid out of the state fund,
(d) Institution that are administered by the state but are established under any trust or
endowment.11

Under Article 29, protection of interests of minorities,

(1) Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof
having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the
same.

(2) No citizen shall be denied admission into any educational institution maintained by
the State or receiving aid out of State funds on grounds only of religion, race, caste, language.

Under Article 30, right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions,

(1) All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to
establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.

(1A) In making any law providing for the compulsory acquisition of any property of an
educational institution established and administered by a minority, referred to in clause (1),
the State shall ensure that the amount fixed by or determined under such law for the
acquisition of such property is such as would not restrict or abrogate the right guaranteed
under that clause.

(2) The state shall not, in granting aid to educational institutions, discriminate against
any educational institution on the ground that it is under the management of a minority,
whether based on religion or language.

11
Bakshi P.M., The Constitution of India, 9th edn., Delhi, Universal Law Publishing co.,2009.

11
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

Under the Constitution religion is not equated with freedom of conscience, and the freedom
of religion (defined as embracing the propagation, practice, and public expression of it) is not
an absolute one and is subject to regulation by the state.

In the context of the Indian Constitution, religion has been defined as having "its basis in a
system of beliefs and directives, which are regarded by those who profess that religion to be
conducive to their spiritual well being”.

In a number of cases the Supreme Court has also held that religion was not merely a matter of
faith and belief, but also included rituals, ceremonies, and religious practices according to the
tenets of a religion. Courts are called on to determine not only whether a practice of a religion
is an essential part of the religion, but also to scrutinize governmental restrictions on the
practice and propagation of religion to determine whether the restrictions pass the test of
public order, morality, and health. If not, they are not to be upheld. India stands for a secular
state. The constitution of India stands for a secular state. The state has no official religion.
Secularism pervades its provisions, which give full opportunity to all persons to profess,
practice and propagate the religion of their choice. “The constitution not only guarantees a
person's freedom of religion and conscience, but also ensures freedom for one who has no
religion, and it scrupulously restrains the state from making any discrimination on grounds of
religion”. A single citizenship is assured to all persons irrespective of their religion.

SECULARISM AND UCC

The 42nd Amendment, 1976 inserted three new words in the preamble. ‘Socialist’ ‘secular’
and ‘integrity’. The spine of controversy revolving around UCC has been secularism and the
freedom of religion enumerated in the Constitution of India. The Preamble of the Constitution
states that India is a "secular democratic republic". This means that there is no State
religion. A secular State shall not discriminate against anyone on the ground of religion. A
State is only concerned with the relation between man and man. It is not concerned with the
relation of man with God. It does not mean allowing all religions to be practiced. It means
that religion should not interfere with the mundane life of an individual. 12

In S.R. Bommai v. Union of India13, as per Justice Jeevan Reddy, it was held that religion is
the matter of individual faith and cannot be mixed with secular activities. Secular activities
can be regulated by the State by enacting a law. Also Supreme Court held that secularism is a
basic feature of the constitution.

In India, there exist a concept of "positive secularism" as distinguished from doctrine of

secularism accepted by America and some European states i.e. there is a wall of separation
between religion and State. In India, positive secularism separates spiritualism with
individual faith. The reason is that America and the European countries went through the
stages of renaissance, reformation and enlightenment and thus they can enact a law stating

12
Pandey J.N., The Constitutional Law of India, 46th edn., Allahabad, Central Law Agency,2009, pg. 435.

13
(1994) SCC 1.

12
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

that State shall not interfere with religion. On the contrary, India has not gone through these
stages and thus the responsibility lies on the State to interfere in the matters of religion so as
to remove the impediments in the governance of the State.

Articles 25[9] and 26[10] guarantees right to freedom of religion. Article 25 guarantees to
every person the freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice and propagate
religion. But this right is subject to public order, morality and health and to the other
provisions of Part III of the Constitution. Article 25 also empowers the State to regulate or
restrict any economic, financial, political or other secular activity, which may be associated
with religious practice and also to provide for social welfare and reforms. The protection of
Articles 25 and 26 is not limited to matters of doctrine of belief. It extends to acts done in
pursuance of religion and, therefore, contains a guarantee for ritual and observations,
ceremonies and modes of worship, which are the integral parts of religion which was decided
in Acharya Jagdishwaranand Avadhut v. Commissioner of Police, Calcutta.14

UCC is not opposed to secularism or will not violate Article 25 and 26. Article 44 is based on
the concept that there is no necessary connection between religion and personal law in a
civilised society. Marriage, succession and like matters are of secular nature and, therefore,
law can regulate them. No religion permits deliberate distortion held in Sarla Mudgal v.
Union of India.15 The UCC will not and shall not result in interference of one’s religious
beliefs relating, mainly to maintenance, succession and inheritance. This means that under the
UCC a Hindu will not be compelled to perform a nikah or a Muslim be forced to carry out
saptapadi. But in matters of inheritance, right to property, maintenance and succession, there
will be a common law.

Justice Khare, in the John Vallamattom v. Union of India 16 case, said, "It is no matter of
doubt that marriage, succession and the like matters of secular character cannot be brought
within the guarantee enshrined under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution."

The Chief Justice also cautioned that any legislation which brought succession and like
matters of secular character within the ambit of Articles 25 and 26 is a suspect legislation.
Article 25 confers right to practice and profess religion, while Article 44 divests religion from
social relations and personal law.

The whole debate can be summed up by the judgement given by Justice R.M. Sahai. He said,
"Ours is a secular democratic republic. Freedom of religion is the core of our culture. Even
the slightest of deviation shakes the social fibre. But religious practices, violative of human
rights and dignity and sacerdotal suffocation of essentially civil and material freedoms are not
autonomy but oppression. Therefore, a unified code is imperative, both, for protection of the
oppressed and for promotion of national unity and solidarity in Sarla Mudgal v. Union of
India case.

14
(1984) 4 SCC 522.
15
(1995) 3 SCC 635.
16
AIR 2003 SC 2902.

13
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

In Aruna Roy v. Union of India 17, the supreme court has said that secularism has a positive
meaning that is developing, understanding and respect towards different religions. Justice
Dharmadhikari quoted Gandhiji who said “the real meaning of secularism is ‘sarva
dharma sambhav’ meaning equal treatment and respect for all religions. But we have
misunderstood the meaning of secularism as ‘sarva dharma abhav’ meaning negation of
all religion.18

NEED OF UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

17
AIR 2003 SC 3176.
18
Agarwala R.K., Hindu Law, 22nd edn., Allahabad, Central Law Agency, 2008, pg. 321.

14
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

The need for uniform civil code has been felt for more than a century. The country has
already suffered a lot in the absence of a uniform code for all. It is rather a pity that the
longest and most elaborately written constitution in the history of mankind, the Indian
constitution is responsible for creation of erosion in society. The society has been fragmented
in the name of religions, sects and sex. Even at present, in India, there are different laws
governing rights related to personal matters or laws like marriage, divorce, maintenance,
adoption and inheritance for different communities. The laws governing inheritance or
divorce among Hindus are thus, very different from those pertaining to Muslims or Christians
and so on. In India, most family law is determined by the religion of the parties concerned
Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists come under Hindu law, whereas Muslims and Christians
have their own laws. Muslim law is based on the Shariat; in all other communities, laws are
codified by an Act of the Indian parliament. There are other sets of laws to deal with criminal
and civil cases, such as the Criminal Procedure Code and the Indian penal code. The
multifarious castes and creeds and their sets of beliefs or practices are bewilderingly
confusing and nowhere is a scenario like in India, of various personal laws jostling together,
allowed.

Does India need the Uniform Civil Code? It varies from person to person. Even Italy has
one, as do the rest of the developed world. It is high time that India had a uniform law dealing
with marriage, divorce, succession, inheritance and maintenance. But, it must be realized that
the scenario in India is extremely complex. India has a long history of personal laws and it
cannot be given up easily. Unless a broad consensus is drawn among different communities,
the Uniform Civil Code can’t do much good to the country. The reality in India is much more
complex than Western societies which have been totally secularised. The need is to work on
the existing laws in such a way that they don’t go against any particular faith or religion.

A Uniform Civil Code administers the same set of secular civil laws to govern different
people belonging to different religions and regions. This supersedes the right of citizens to be
governed under different personal laws based on their religion or ethnicity. The common
areas covered by a civil code include: Personal Status, Rights related to acquisition and
administration of property, Marriage, divorce and adoption.

Uniform Civil Code will in the long run ensure equality. While other personal laws have
undergone reform, the Muslim law has not. It perhaps makes little sense to allow Muslims,
for example, to marry more than once, but prosecute Hindus or Christians for doing the same.
Therefore, there is the demand for a uniform civil code for all religions19.

Also, UCC will help to promote gender equality. Several liberals and women’s groups have
argued that the uniform civil code gives women more rights.

However, the opponents of UCC argue that this law is poking into their religious practices.
They feel that this code will affect the religious freedom of minorities. One fails to
19
Deshta K., Uniform civil code,3rd edn., Deep and Deep Publications, 1995, pg. 213.

15
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

understand how abiding the law of land can go against religious principles! The claim that the
sentiments of the minorities are not considered while implementing a common law is thus
beyond comprehension. UCC does not insist people from one religion to start practicing
rituals of other religions. All it says is, with changing living styles along with the time, there
should be a Uniform Civil code irrespective of all religions as far as social ethics are
concerned.20

The crusade for the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code and homogenizing the
personal laws is justified and should receive the support of all progressive thinking Indians,
not because of any bias, but because it is the need of the hour. But it needs to come on the
heels of a political consensus and that is what needs to be evolved. It is rightly believed that
the Uniform Civil Code is necessary to effect an integration of India by bringing all
communities into a common platform which at present is governed by personal laws which
do not form the essence of any religion. India as a nation will not be truly secular unless
uniformity is established in the form of rational non-religious codified laws.

Politics apart, the case for a Uniform Civil Code - which will cover the entire gamut of laws
governing rights relating to property, marriage, divorce, maintenance, adoption and
inheritance - has been most argued on behalf of women. There is universal agreement that
personal laws, regardless of the community, are skewed against women. In the long sittings
of the Constituent Assembly, it seems none had a notion about the injustice that was being
done to women in the name of religion as also to the majority community by retaining certain
customs among the minority communities and by giving them certain privileges. A uniform
code provides equal rights to men and women. The absence of a uniform code is thus
responsible for one calamitous vicissitude in the nation — the subjugation of women in
almost all the faiths.

One reason why personalized laws based on religion is not favoured is because religious laws
tend to be highly gender biased. Most major religions developed, over time, a bias towards
women - treating them as somewhat inferior. In Christianity, Eve was meant to be the root
cause of all evil. In Hinduism, Sati was practiced in some communities for ages till the
British formally put a stop to it. The practice of dowry and the ill treatment of widows
continue till today in many regions. In Islam, the staunchest Muslims don’t let women travel
alone, wear something revealing or go to work. These are just a few examples of the deep
underlying biases that lie within faiths. Such practices are justified via religious texts or
customs that simply “must not be broken”. It has taken generations of rebellion to inculcate
any change within these religions. Also, religious laws cannot be viewed objectively. They
are created from sentiments regarding what is correct according to conceptions of God. Thus
to alter such a law one also has to change perceptions regarding core religious fundamentals.
As a result, true progress in terms of equality can be hindered by many years.
Let us take a look into the case of Imrana – a 28 years old woman, and the mother of five
20
legalserviceindia.com/articles/ucc.htm.

16
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

children. On June 6, 2005, Imrana, was raped by her 69 year-old father in-law Ali
Mohammad. Soon after she was raped, a local Muslim panchayat (council of elders) asked
her to treat her husband Nur Ilahi as her son and declared their marriage null and void! Can
any law of the land justify this?21

The fact that such a verdict could take place in India in the year 2005 is insulting to our legal
system. Had she been a Hindu or Christian, such a verdict would not have occurred, further
highlighting the inequality of the situation. In India, secularism has come to mean “non-
intervening in the matter of religion”. This needs to be relooked and debated as there
cannot be any discrimination in the guise of secularism.22

The freedom to adopt any religion is enshrined in the Constitution. It seems quite an innocent
and logical right. But from it springs the natural corollary of preaching and propagating a
religion. In an educated society, it has no serious bearings but, in an illiterate and uneducated
society, it has very grave consequences, especially when the whole game is politicized. The
politicization results in appeasing the minority by giving them certain rights ultimately to
catch their votes or to gain their sympathy. Secular India has upheld the freedom of religion
at the cost of national unity. The interpretation of laws, in the absence of a uniform code for
all religious communities debars other religious communities from becoming a party to the
case in the court in which an appeal is made to restrain the religious heads from harassing the
members of that community. A friend, an organization, even a brother is not accepted a party
against injustice if he/she/it does not belong to that faith. The absence of a common code has
thus, deprived the people of having a common cause and is responsible for the subjugation of
reformers in the name of religion in the biggest so-called secular nation.

Furthermore, the perception that a uniform civil code would change only Muslim personal
law is wrong, and probably came about because the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) is
the only political party that actively supports it. Orthodox practices in Hindu personal law or
Christian personal law will also have to undergo changes. For instance, the law pertaining to
succession among Hindus is unequal in the way it treats men and women. The concept of the
“Hindu undivided family”, with respect to succession, would be changed under a Uniform
Civil Code. Christian personal law does not allow the succession of wealth to charitable
organizations. Under a Uniform Civil Code, this law may very well be altered. This also
explains why historically changes in personal law have been resisted not just by one
community, but by the ruling orthodoxy in all of them.

Moreover, many Islamic countries have codified and reformed Muslim personal Law to
check its misuse. Muslim countries like Egypt, Turkey and even Pakistan have reformed their
laws. Terence Farias, in his chapter The Development of Islamic Law points out that the 1961
Muslim Family Law Ordinance of Pakistan "makes it obligatory for a man who desires to

21
jurisonline.in/2010/03/uniform-civil-code-an-unfulfilled-vision/

22
www.legalsutra.com.

17
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

take a second wife to obtain a written permission from a government appointed Arbitration
Council." The interesting point regarding Pakistan is that until 1947 both India and Pakistan
had governed Muslims under the Shariat Act of 1937. However, by 1961 Pakistan, a Muslim
country had actually reformed its Muslim Law more than India had and this remains true
today. There is no reason why India should continue with vastly discriminatory personal
laws. In fact, the reforms meted out in Tunisia and Turkey helped abolish Polygamy.
Polygamy has also been either banned or severely restricted in Syria, Egypt, Turkey,
Morocco, Iran and even in Pakistan. Besides Muslims who live in U.S.A., Australia, U.K.
and other parts of Europe readily accepted the civil laws applicable uniformly to all citizens
in the respective countries but do not feel insecure on that account. So, then, why, in India
should there be such a feeling? Iran, South Yemen, and Singapore all reformed their Muslim
laws in the 1970s, although Iran appears to have backslid in this respect. In the end the
argument is quite clear.

POSITION OF THE LEGISLATURE

The question of implementation of a Common Civil Code has been raised mainly with regard
to matters where, the personal laws of a religious community have been challenged in the
court of law as being violative of the Constitution or against general public interest.
Our law makers have generally shied away from legislating on such points of personal law as
are considered to be of controversial or sensitive nature, for fear such legislation being
labeled as an intrusion on the above rights thereby resulting in strong backlash. This became
evident from the reaction to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Shah Bano case which
gave a divorced Muslim woman the right to claim maintenance even after the period of iddat.
If the amount known as maher, paid to her on divorce was not sufficient for her livelihood,
she could claim maintenance under S.125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. There was great
agitation against this decision, led by Mullas and Maulvis and other fundamentalist sections,
as being against the tenets of Islam. Succumbing to the pressure of vote-bank politics and in
order to appease the Muslim fundamentalists, the Rajiv Gandhi government enacted The
Muslim Women (Protection of Rights in Divorce) Act to undo this decision. This Act
exempted Muslims from the general law regulations of the Cr.P.C, including S.125. It tried to
restrict the divorced Muslim woman’s right to maintenance up to the iddat period only and
provided that under section 3(1)(a) a divorced women is entitled to reasonable and fair
provision and maintenance within the iddat period.

Similarly in case of the Adoption of Children Bill 1972, the Muslim community opposed a
uniform law regarding adoption applicable to all communities since Islam does not recognize
adoption. Due to this opposition, the bill was subsequently dropped and reintroduced in 1980

18
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

with an express clause of non-applicability to Muslims. This was again opposed, this time by
the Bombay Zoroastrian Jashan Committee, which formed a special committee to exempt
Parsis from the bill. The Adoption of Children Bill, 1995, was passed by both Houses of the
Maharashtra legislative assembly, but is still awaiting presidential assent.

What needs to be understood is that ‘the religion of an individual or denomination has

nothing to do in the matter of socio-economic laws of the State’. The freedom of religion
conferred by the Constitution is not absolute and by no means does it allow religion to
contravene the secular rights of the citizens and the power of the State to regulate the socio-
economic relations. Basically, a Common Civil Code will override only those personal laws
which do not form the essence of any religion. The key word here is ‘essence.’ Personal laws
which form the fundamental basis or the core of any belief system are ideally, excluded from
the purview of the Common Civil Code.

POSITION OF THE SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court seems to have a divided opinion on the introduction of a Uniform Civil
Code. On one hand, it has rejected attempts to do so through public interest litigation but on
the other, it has recommended early legislation for its implementation.
In Pannalal Bansilal v. State of Andhra Pradesh 23, it held that a uniform law though highly
desirable, the enactment thereof in one go may be counter-productive to the unity and
integrity of the nation. Gradual progressive change should be brought about.
Similarly, in Maharishi Avadhesh v. Union of India 24, the Supreme Court dismissed a writ
petition to introduce a common Civil Code on the ground that it was a matter for the
legislature and in Ahmedabad Women Action Group v. Union of India 25, the Supreme
Court showed reluctance to interfere in matters of personal law.
But in Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India, the Supreme Court directed the then Prime Minister
P.V. Narsimha Rao to take a fresh look at Article 44, which the Court held to be imperative
for both protection of the oppressed and promotion of national integrity and unity. It
instructed the Union Government through the Secretary to Ministry of Law and Justice to file
an affidavit, enumerating the steps taken and efforts made by the Government towards
achieving a common civil code for the citizens of India. The Division Bench of Kuldip Singh

23
AIR 1996 SC 1023.
24
1994 SCC (1) 713.
25
AIR 1997, 3 SCC 573.

19
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

and R.M. Sahai said that since 1950 a number of Governments have come and gone but have
failed to make any efforts towards implementing the constitutional mandate under Article 44.
It is based on the concept that there is no necessary connection between religion and personal
law in a civilized society. No religion permits deliberate distortion. Marriage, succession and
the like are matters of a secular nature and therefore can be regulated by law. Unfortunately,
it was later clarified in an appeal that the direction issued by the Court was only an obiter
dicta and not legally binding on the Government.
In John Vallamattom v. Union of India, it was held that Articles 25 and 26 of the
Constitution protect only those rituals and ceremonies which form an integral part of a
religion, and that matters of a secular character cannot be brought under the guarantee
enshrined under them. The Chief Justice of India firmly emphasized that enactment of
Uniform Civil Code would end all such problems arising out of ideological conflict.
In Danial Latifi v. Union of India, a very controversial question of political significance (in
the background of a secular constitution and the concept of welfare state) was revisited i.e.
whether or not a divorced Muslim woman after divorce post iddat period is entitled to
maintenance by her husband. Here, the Supreme Court adopted a middle path and held that
reasonable and fair provisions include provision for the future of the divorced wife (including
maintenance) and it does not confine itself to the iddat period only.
In Pragati Varghese v. Cyril George Varghese 26, the full bench of the Bombay high court
has struck down section 10 of the Indian divorce act under which a Christian wife had to
prove adultery along with cruelty or desertion while seeking a divorce on the ground that it
violates the fundamental right of a Christian woman to live with human dignity under article
21 of the constitution. The court also declared sections 17 and 20 of the act invalid which
provided that an annulment or divorce passed by a district court was required to be confirmed
by a 3 judge of the high court. The court said that section 10 of the act compels the wife to
continue to live with man who has deserted her or treated with cruelty. Such a life is sub
human. There is denial to dissolve the marriage when the marriage has broken down
irretrievably.

IMPLEMENTATION AT STATE-LEVEL

26
AIR 1997 Bom 349.

20
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

Even though a nation-wide Civil Code is not yet in place, a positive step in this direction has
already been taken. The state of Goa has enacted a set of ‘Family Laws’, which is applicable
to all communities; Hindus, Christians, Muslims and others. There is no discrimination on the
basis of religion, caste or gender. The Goa civil code is largely based on the Portuguese civil
code of 1867, with some modifications based on the Portuguese Decrees on Marriage and
Divorce of 1910, the Portuguese Decrees on Canonical Marriages of 1946, and the
Portuguese Gentle Hindu Usages Decrees of 1880.  It includes laws governing marriage and
divorce, succession, guardianship, property, domicile, possession, etc. Muslim
fundamentalists opposed its enactment in the early 1980s but their attempts to introduce
Sharia law in Goa were ultimately met with defeat by liberal Muslims who insisted on the
continuance of the unified civil code. Former Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud expressed
hope that the Goan Civil Code would one day “awaken the rest of bigoted India and inspire it
to emulate Goa.”
There are two important aspects of this code which assume great significance in the context
of codification of Indian laws:
· Civil registration of marriage is mandatory. Around 98 per cent of Goan marriages take
place under Community Property law by virtue of which, each spouse automatically acquires
joint ownership of all assets already in their possession as well as those due to them by
inheritance. These assets may not be disposed of or encumbered in any way by one spouse
without the express consent of the other.
· The registration of births and deaths is also mandatory.   The children of deceased parents
fall in the category of mandatory heirs.  They cannot be disinherited whether male or female,
except under extraordinary circumstances. If the deceased parent leaves no will, all
mandatory heirs are entitled to an equal share of the estate of the deceased. If the deceased
has made a will, he may only dispose of 50 per cent of the estate. This is called the quota
disponivel.  The remaining 50 per cent must be divided equally among all mandatory heirs. 
Such a provision ensures the just distribution of assets among all children, whether male or
female.

CODIFICATION

21
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

The biggest obstacle in implementing the UCC, apart from obtaining a consensus, is the
drafting. Should UCC be a blend of all the personal laws or should it be a new law adhering
to the constitutional mandate? There is a lot of literature churned out on UCC but there is no
model law drafted. Many think that under the guise of UCC, the Hindu law will be imposed
on all. The possibility of UCC being only a repackaged Hindu law was ruled out by Prime
Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee when he said that there will be a new code based on gender
equality and comprising the best elements in all the personal laws.27

The UCC should carve a balance between protection of fundamental rights and religious
dogmas of individuals. It should be a code, which is just and proper according to a man of
ordinary prudence, without any bias with regards to religious or political considerations.
Here is an overview of the essentials of the UCC:

MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE

The personal laws of each religion contain different essentials of a valid marriage. The new
code should have the basic essentials of valid marriage which shall include:

(i) The new code should impose monogamy banning multiple marriages under any religion.
Polygamy discriminates against the women and violates their basic human rights. Thus,
monogamy should be imposed, not because it is the Hindu law, but because it adheres to
Article 21 of the Constitution and basic human values.28

(ii) The minimum age limit for a male should be 21 years and for a female should be 18
years. This would help in curbing child marriages. Punishment should be prescribed for any
person violating this provision. Also, punishment for other persons involved in such an act,
like the relatives, should be prescribed which would have a deterrent effect on the society.

(iii) Registration of marriage should be made compulsory. A valid marriage will be said to
have solemnised when the man and the woman sign their declaration of eligibility before a
registrar. This will do away with all the confusion regarding the validity of the marriage.

(iv) The grounds and procedure for divorce should be specifically laid down. The grounds
enumerated in the code should be reasonable and the procedure prescribed should be
according to the principles of natural justice. Also, there should be a provision for divorce by
mutual consent.

SUCCESSION AND INHERITANCE

27
articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com.

28
Ahmad a., Mohammedan Law, 22nd edn., Allahabad, Central Law Agency, 2008.

22
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

This area throws up even more intractable problems. In Hindu law, there is a distinction
between a joint family property and self acquired property which is not so under the Muslim
law. The Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), formed under the Hindu law, run businesses and
own agricultural lands. Under the UCC, this institution of HUF, peculiar to the Hindus, has to
be abolished. There are also fetters imposed on the extent to which one can bequeath property
by will under the Muslim law. Considering all these, the UCC should include:

(i) Equal shares to son and daughter from the property of the father, whether self acquired or
joint family property. There should be no discrimination based on sex in the matters of
inheritance. The provisions of the Hindu Succession (Maharashtra Amendment) Act, 1994
can be taken as guiding principles wherein the daughter of a coparcener shall by birth become
the coparcener in her own right in the same manner as a son and have the same rights in the
coparcenary property as she would have had if she had been a son, inclusive the right to claim
by survivorship and shall be subject to same liabilities and disabilities as the son.

(ii) Provisions for inheritance of the property of mother, which she has self acquired or
acquired through her father or relatives.

(iii) The provisions relating to will should be in consonance with the principles of equity.
There should be no limitations imposed on the extent to which the property can be
bequeathed, the persons to whom such property can be bequeath and the donation of the
property by will for religious and charitable purpose.

(iv) The essentials of valid will, the procedure for registration and execution of the will
should be provided for.

(v) Provisions for gifts should not contain any limitations, though essential of valid gift and
gift deed should be specified.

MAINTENANCE

The maintenance laws for the Hindus and Muslims are very different. Apart from personal
laws, a non-Muslim woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 of Code of Criminal
Procedure. A Muslim woman can claim maintenance under the Muslim Women (Right to
Protection on Divorce) Act, 1986. Apart from maintenance of wife, there are also provisions
for maintenance of mother, father, son and unmarried daughter under the Hindu law. The
UCC should contain the following with regards to maintenance: 29
(i) A husband should maintain the wife during the marriage and also after they have divorced
till the wife remarries.

29
Pandey J.N., The Constitutional Law of India, 46th edn., Allahabad, Central Law Agency,2009.

23
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

(ii) The amount of alimony should be decided on basis of the income of the husband, the
status and the lifestyle of the wife.

(iii) The son and daughter should be equally responsible to maintain the parents. The reason
for this being that if she claims equal share of the property of her parents, she should share
the duty to maintain her parents equally.

(iv) The parents should maintain their children - son till he is capable of earning on his own
and daughter, till she gets married.

Thus based on these fundamental principles, an unbiased and fair UCC can be framed which
will be in consonance with the Constitution.

WORKING OF UCC AND THE INDIAN SCENARIO

How full proof will be the UCC? Will there be more abuse and less obedience of UCC? Will
UCC have negative effect on the society? Such questions are bound to be raised after the
implementation of the UCC. All laws are formulated to be obeyed, but they are abused. This
does not mean that law should not be implemented. Similarly, there is a great possibility of
the UCC being abused, but this should not eschew the Parliament from enacting the UCC; the
social welfare and benefits resulting from the implementation of UCC are far greater.

While explaining the reason for including Article 44 in the Directives Principles, it was
observed,

"When you want to consolidate a community, you have to take into consideration the benefits
which may accrue to the whole community and not to the customs of a part of it. If you look
at the countries in Europe, which have a Civil Code, everyone who goes there forms a part of
the world and every minority has to submit to that Civil Code. It is not felt to be tyrannical to
the minorities."

Some legal experts argue that progressive law is welcomed but a suitable atmosphere must be
created in which all sections feel secure enough to sit together and cull out the most
progressive of their personal laws. But this can be answered by an example of Hindu law.
When the Hindu Code Bill, which covers Buddhist, Sikhs, Jains as well as different religious
denominations of Hindus, was notified, there was a lot of protest. And the then Law Minister,
Dr. Ambedkar, had said that for India’s unity, the country needs a codified law. In a similar
fashion, the UCC can be implemented, which will cover all the religions, whether major or
minor, practiced in India and any person who comes to India has to abide by the Code.

Not many know that a UCC exists in the small state of Goa accepted by all communities. The
Goa Civil Code collectively called Family Laws, was framed and enforced by the Portuguese
colonial rulers through various legislations in the 19th and 20th centuries. After the liberation
of Goa in 1961, the Indian State scrapped all the colonial laws and extended the central laws
to the territory but made the exception of retaining the Family Laws because all the

24
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

communities in Goa wanted it. The most significant provision in this law is the prenuptial
public deed regarding the disposal of immovable and movable property in the event of
divorce or death. During matrimony, both parents have a common right over the estate, but
on dissolution, the property has to be divided equally; son and daughters have the equal right
on the property. As the procedure involves compulsory registration of marriage, this
effectively checks child and bigamous marriage.

The philosophy behind the Portuguese Civil Code was to strengthen the family as the
backbone of society by inculcating a spirit of tolerance between husband and wife and
providing for inbuilt safeguard against injustice by one spouse against the other.

Commenting that the dream of a UCC in the country finds its realisation in Goa, former Chief
Justice of India Y.V. Chandrachud had once expressed hope that it would one day "awaken
the rest of bigoted India” in Mohammad Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum.30

CONCLUSION
30
AIR 1985 SC 945.

25
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

In 1955, Jawaharlal Nehru attempted codification of Hindu rituals and customs as part of his
reformist vision. The process had already begun in the Constituent Assembly. A select
committee had been formed to draft a new Hindu Code to systematize social practices. The
orthodox elements violently opposed this and recommendations of the committee could not
be made into a law.

But Nehru was convinced about it and brought in the Hindu Code Bill in 1955, which gave
birth to a host of legislations including Hindu Marriage Act, 1956. When the debate was
raging on the Hindu Code Bill in Parliament in May 1955, a valid question was raised by
many members including J B Kripalani, that is why only codify Hindu rituals and customs
and not those of Muslims?

Kriplani charged government as well as Nehru of being communal. He accused the Prime
Minister of lacking in courage to bring in reforms by codifying the Muslim law.

Exactly 50 years later, the Supreme Court delivered the Shah Bano judgment, applying the
secular provision of Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code to rule that Muslim women
could not be allowed to be rendered destitute by denial of maintenance by their husbands
citing the customary laws of the community.31

But, as time passed, the Supreme Court continued to rule in 2001 in Danial Latifi case, in
2007 in Iqbal Bano case and in 2009 in Shah Bano case that Muslim women could not be
deprived of the benefit of Section 125 of Cr.P.C.32

The December 4, 2009 judgment is most categorical. It said, "Even if a Muslim woman has
been divorced, she would be entitled to claim maintenance from her husband under section
125 Cr.P.C after the expiry of the period of iddat as long as she does not marry."

After 63 years of independence and 60 years of the Constitution, our political leadership has
not been brave enough to introduce reforms in the social practices of Muslim community.
Ironically, Article 44 of the Constitution says, "The State shall endeavour to secure for the
citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India." Uniform civil code of India is
a term referring to the concept of a dominant Civil Law Code in India. A uniform civil code
administers the same set of secular civil laws to govern all people irrespective of their
religion, caste and tribe. This supersedes the right of citizens to be governed under different
personal laws based on their religion or caste or tribe. Such codes are in place in most modern
nations.

31
www.legalindia.in.

32
legalserviceindia.com/articles/ucc.htm.

26
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

Sadly, none of the governments, from Nehru to Manmohan Singh, had the courage to
attempt UCC, and that too after repeated admonition and expression of anguish from the
SC.So, the real social opposition each time has come from the Muslim community that sees
any attempt to bring a UCC as an attack on its religious rights. The debate in India seems to
have gone the way of the secularists in this respect and the recent rulings by the Supreme
Court calling for a Uniform Code has not witnessed the protests and alarms that took place
following the Shah Bano case in 1985. It is quite possible that the Muslim community sees a
Uniform code as a fait accompli after almost 60 years of Indian independence. 33The matter is
far more political than legal. Every time the issue has come up there have been angry words
from both sides of the debate. Religious fundamentalism must go, social and economic
justice must be made available to the Muslim women and other women and their dignity and
quality be ensured, basic human rights guaranteed and there should be an end to exploitation
of Muslim women also If Muslim countries can reform Muslim Personal Law, and if western
democracies have fully secular systems, then why are Indian Muslims living under laws
passed in the 1930s? also between the Supreme Court’s mixed response and the legislature’s
wariness, the implementation of a national common Civil Code seems to be a distant dream.
It is only enlightened public opinion that will help fulfil it. Communal divides, vote-bank
politics, staunch fundamentalism are currently barriers to its realization but with time and
tolerance they can be overcome. What must be perceived as a matter of defining an
individual’s rights deteriorates instead, into a “majority versus minority” issue. The welfare
of the community as a whole must be considered instead of a particular class or sect. No
doubt, the realization of a common Civil Code is a tough job, given the vast ideological
diversity. But a uniform civil law is necessary in order to be truly secular. It is our collective
duty as a modern society to rise above cultural and religious differences and give effect to
this constitutional mandate which is 60 years overdue.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

33
articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com.

27
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

BOOKS:

1. Ratnaparkhi M.S., Uniform civil code, 3rd edn., New Delhi, Atlantic Publication,
1997.
2. Bakshi P.M., The Constitution of India, 9th edn., Delhi, Universal Law Publishing
co.,2009.
3. Pandey J.N., The Constitutional Law of India, 46th edn., Allahabad, Central Law
Agency,2009.
4. Menski W., Modern Indian Family Law, Surrey, Curzon Press, 2001.
5. Deshta K., Uniform civil code,3rd edn., Deep and Deep Publications, 1995.
6. Agarwala R.K., Hindu Law, 22nd edn., Allahabad, Central Law Agency, 2008.
7. Ahmad a., Mohammedan Law, 22nd edn., Allahabad, Central Law Agency, 2008.
8. Kusum, Family Law I, 3rd edn., Nagpur, Lexis Nexis, 2011.
9. Basu D.D., Shorter Constitution of India, Nagpur, Wadhwa, 2009.

WEBSITE VISITED:

1. www.legalsutra.com
2. legalserviceindia.com/articles/ucc.htm
3. http://upscportal.com/civilservices/Study-Notes/Uniform-civil-code-vs-Right-to-
Religion
4. www.legalindia.in
5. jurisonline.in/2010/03/uniform-civil-code-an-unfulfilled-vision/
6. articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com
7. www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1406604

28