UNIFORM CIVIL CODE AND ITS HISTORY

 India has number of laws when it comes to its personal laws or family laws to be specific. Every religion has their own personal laws be it Christians, Parsis, Hindus or Muslims. Some of these laws are codified some of these are not, some are old and some are new,  needless to say this system has created disharmony and confusion in our family laws  at the present.  

India in its Constitution has tried to establish the ideal of secularism and it in that regards is trying achieving the status of Uniform Civil Code in the country. UCC is enshrined under Art. 44 of the Constitution stating “the State shall endeavor to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code (UCC) throughout the territory of India.”.  UCC basically calls for framing of one common law for the whole of India which is applicable to all people irrespective of their religion in matters relating to marriage, divorce, inheritance, adoption etc. 

UCC would help in laying down protection to the weaker section of the society including the women and the religious minorities. It would also help in making the complex laws revolving marriage, inheritance, succession etc more comprehensible and same for all the people irrespective of their faith. UCC would also lead to promotion of gender parity as a common law would help in removing gender biases currently present in respective religions.

UCC was introduced as a Directive Principle in our Constitution after the debate on the same in the Constituent Assembly on 23rd November 1948. Major opposition came from the Muslim members of the Assembly including Ismail Shah, Naziruddin Ahmad and Pocker Sahib Bahadur. They argued that UCC was in contravention of freedom of religion provided by our Constitution and would create disharmony amongst the Muslim community. In their arguments they further proposed amendments to include proviso stating that the personal laws shall be kept outside the scope of UCC and UCC shall only be imposed in the country with the consent of the Muslim community.

The advocates for UCC included members like K.M. Munshi, Alladi Krishnaswamy and Dr. Ambedkar. They defended the provision stating that it was essential for the unity of the nation and to bring in reforms with regards to the rights of the woman. Dr. Ambedkar also pointed out that there is nothing new about UCC and it is already in existence except for the matters pertaining to marriage and inheritance. 

Once the debate finished the draft article and was put for vote, the Assembly adopted the provision as Art. 44. The debate and the proceeding of the Constituent Assembly clearly showed that UCC was a very controversial topic and the decision to adopt UCC as a Directive Principle was a compromise between both groups as a DPSP is a non justiciable right and cannot be enforced by the Court and only serves as a guiding principle to the State.

The debate for UCC is still going strong with religious minorities  fearful that a majoritarian rule is being imposed forcefully on them which would erase their own religious and cultural identity. This fear is far from the truth but it can very well be acknowledged that such assumptions by the people are legitimate and a very slow change with education and awareness for all is required while bringing in UCC.



Tanushree Gupta

Asst. Professor

JEMTEC, School of Law


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Teacher As: Critical Pedagogue

ROLE CONFLICT PROBLEM AMONG WORKING WOMEN

Rights and obligations of Issuer, Participant and Beneficial owner under the Depository Act, 1996