Abstract: The Uniform Civil Code in India is an issue that always questions whether equality can coexist with diversity. Enshrined in Article 44 of the Indian Constitution, it aims to institute a uniform set of personal laws regarding matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption irrespective of religion. Proponents consider the UCC as imperative for achieving gender justice, national integration, and equalization of personal laws, in particular the one that perpetuates inequality, especially towards women. The judicial decisions of the Indian judiciary in 2017 through the abolishing of triple talaq proved the need for legal reforms that protect the rights of women.

The opponents, however, consider the UCC as an impending danger to India's religious and cultural diversity. The pluralistic nature of Indian society with different religious and customary practices hampers the application of an all-inclusive uniform law code. Communities view the application of the UCC as an encroachment upon the cultural identities and violations of their religious rights. Experience shows that reform in personal law, especially concerning Hindus, has faced immense resistance.

This paper examines the tension in the goals of equality espoused by the UCC and the protection of diversity, looking at India's historical, judicial, and political journey to a possible Uniform Civil Code. It concludes that to achieve the twin goals of justice and respect for diversity, a sensitive, gradual, and inclusive approach is in order.

INTRODUCTION:

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) can still be considered to be the whole talk of the town in Indian society. It is because the two opponents are either people who are legally inclined or those who believe that culture and religion should be preserved. As per article 44 of the Indian constitution, it is stipulated that all personal laws that are related to religion should be replaced by just one set of laws. These laws should touch on issues that include but are not limited to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption. In fact, while freedom, justice, equality, and fraternity may be the components of the constitution, it has proven to be too big a step as it has also impacted India's pluralistic nature. This article is about the usefulness, drawbacks, and approaches that might be taken in an Indian context with respect to the UCC.

Historical and Constitutional Context

Pre-Independence (colonial era):

The Lex Loci Report of October 1840- Firstly it was a demand for uniformity in the codification of Indian laws dealing with crime, evidence and contracts. Yet, it also made it clear that the personal laws of Hindus and Muslims should not be included in such codification. Irrespective of the country’s political machinations and the plethora of its laws, The 1859 Queen’s Proclamation-Hence promised such complete non –non-interference in religious matters.

In this way, however, personal laws are governed however there exist distinct codes of personal laws for different Communities in India regardless of criminal laws being codified for the whole country for common use.

Post-Colonial era (1947-1985):

UCC spanning a long period was also echoed by prominent leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru and Dr. B.R Ambedkar due to tensions present among different communities. Instead, Primarily for fears of religious fundamentalists, the UCC was presented within Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP, Article 44). 

SOME OF THE REFORMS OF THIS PERIOD INCLUDE:

• The Hindu Code bill: Dr B R Ambedkar also took the lead in drafting the Bill, which sought to include provisions for divorce, disallowing polygamy, and giving daughters the right to inherit. Despite the storm of opposition to the code, a cut-down version was in place through four different legislative enactments.
• Succession Act: The Hindu Succession Act, of 1956, originally did not give daughters inheritance rights in ancestral property. They could only ask for a right to sustenance from a joint Hindu family. But this disparity was removed by an amendment to the Act on September 9, 2005The Hindu Marriage Act, Minority Guardianship Act, Adoptions and Maintenance Act.

Special Marriage Act: 

It was enacted in 1954 which meant civil marriages outside of religious personal law. Judicial interventions:

Shah Bano case (1985)

A 73-year-old woman named Shah Bano was divorced through triple talaq saying "I divorce thee" three times. She was not given any kind of maintenance by her husband and approached the courts. The decision of the District Court and the High Court was pronounced in her favour. As a result, her husband appealed to the Supreme Court stating that he had done all that was expected of him under Islamic law.

The Supreme Court decided in her favour in 1985 under the "maintenance of wives, children and parents" provision (Section 125) of the All India Criminal Code, which applied to all citizens irrespective of religion. Further, It recommended that a uniform civil code be set up.

Facts about the case:

• Under Muslim personal law, maintenance was to be paid only till the period of iddat. (three lunar months roughly 90 days ).
• Section 125 of CrPC (criminal procedure code) applied to all citizens, and provided for maintenance of the wife.
• Impact – After this historic decision, nationwide discussions, meetings and agitations were held. Then government under pressure passed The Muslim Women's (Right to Protection on Divorce) Act (MWA) in 1986, which made Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code inapplicable to Muslim women.

Daniel Latifi Case

Muslim Women's Act (MWA) was challenged on the grounds that it violated the right to equality under Articles 14& 15 as well as the right to life under Article 21. The Supreme Court while holding the law as constitutional, harmonised it with section 125 of CrPC and held that the amount received by a wife during iddat period should be large enough to maintain her during iddat as well as provide for her future. Therefore, under the law of the land, a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to the provision of maintenance for a lifetime or until she is remarried.

Sarla Mudgal Case

This case was regarding the issue that whether a Hindu husband married under the Hindu law, by embracing Islam, can solemnize a second marriage. The court held that the Hindu marriage solemnized under Hindu law can only be dissolved on any of the grounds specified under the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. Conversion to Islam and marrying again, would not by itself dissolve the Hindu marriage under the act and thus, a second marriage solemnized after converting to Islam would be an offence under section 494 of the Indian Penal Code(IPC).

John Vallamattom Case

In this case, a priest from Kerala, John Vallamattom challenged the Constitutional validity of Section 118 of the Indian Succession Act, which is applicable for non-Hindus in India. Mr Vallamatton contended that Section 118 of the act was discriminatory against Christians as it imposes unreasonable restrictions on their donation of property for religious or charitable purposes by will. The bench struck down the section as unconstitutional.

CONSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT

Part IV, Article 44 of the Constitution reads as follows: "The State shall endeavour to secure the citizen a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India.".

However, Article 37 of the Constitution itself clarifies that the DPSP "shall not be enforceable by any court". Still, they are "fundamental in the governance of the country". This shows that though our constitution itself believes that a Uniform Civil Code should be implemented in some manner, it does not make this implementation mandatory. Other provisions relating to freedom of religion and the principle of secularism include:

• Article 15 - No discrimination based on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
• Article 25 - Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion, subject to reasonable restrictions on the grounds of public order, health and morality.
• Article 25(2) - Provides for regulation of secular activities associated with religious practices, social welfare and reform.
• Article 26 - Right to establish and administer religious institutions.
• Article 27 - Prohibition of the state to charge any tax, the collections of which are applied for the benefit of a particular religion.
• Article 28 - Religious instruction in educational institutions.

The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act inserted the word 'secularism' in the preamble. In the S.R.Bommai vs Union of India case, the Supreme Court held secularism as a basic feature of the constitution.

Arguments in Favor of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC):

1. Equality and Justice: The most prominent argument to introduce a UCC is equality and justice for everyone. Presently, because of different personal laws of different religions, unequal treatment is being given, mainly in the context of gender. A UCC would bring all citizens, irrespective of religion or gender, under one law, thereby upholding fairness and justice.
2. National Integration: A UCC can facilitate national integration by instilling a common identity among citizens. When everyone is governed under the same laws for personal matters, it can enhance social harmony and reduce divisions along religious lines. It can further strengthen the feeling of national integration and unity in a country like India which is so diverse.
3. Simplified Legal System: Having one set of laws to govern personal issues would also make the legal system less confusing. It would ensure that a person understands their rights and obligations without confusing them in different personal laws. It would result in more effective legal processes without confusion and litigation.
4. Secularism: India is a secular country as the state does not favour any particular religion. Implementing a UCC will bring this principle by having the laws not be based on religious scriptures but be uniform among all citizens. This upholds the secular nature of the state as it affirms that citizens of equal stature, irrespective of faith, will be dealt with evenly.
5. Modernization and Reform: Personal laws, which are based upon religious practices, are sometimes behind times and out of date in comparison with contemporary value and human rights standards. A UCC would allow for the modernization of laws, making them more relevant to current times and aligning them with international human rights principles.
6. Legal Clarity and Consistency: With different personal laws, there can be inconsistencies and contradictions in legal judgments. A UCC would provide legal clarity and consistency, ensuring that similar cases are judged similarly, regardless of the religious background of the parties involved.
7. Protection of Vulnerable Sections: Uniform laws can provide greater protection to vulnerable sections of society like women and children. This ensures that their rights are uniformly protected in every community, without any kind of religious law bias and discrimination.
8. Minimized Communal Politics: Sometimes personal laws based on religion have the tendency to turn out as a tool of communal politics, which breeds division and conflict. A UCC would reduce the scope for such politics by ensuring that all citizens are governed by the same set of laws, leading to social cohesion and harmony.

Arguments Against Uniform Civil Code (UCC):

1. Cultural and Religious Diversity: India is a country with immense cultural and religious diversity. Each community has its own traditions, customs, and personal laws that are deeply rooted in their cultural and religious beliefs. Applying a UCC would be seen as imposing something that does not respect this diversity, which may create resistance and resentment among different communities.
2. Freedom of Religion: The Indian Constitution has accorded the right to freedom of religion, which enables and empowers individuals to worship and propagate their faith freely. Personal laws form integral parts of religious practice for communities. A UCC will be seen as a taking away of this right when communities are compelled to lose their traditional practices in respect of a standardized set of laws.
3. Practical Difficulties: Implementing a UCC has its own practical problems. A nation like India with so large and diverse population would become hard to craft into a single code which takes on board the different needs and sensibilities of all communities. Also, those who feel that their traditional practices are being assaulted are likely to make serious attempts at social disturbances.
4. Political Sensitivities: The issue of a UCC is highly sensitive and politically charged. Different political parties and interest groups may have conflicting views on its implementation, often using it as a tool for political mobilization. This can lead to polarizing debates and hinder the formulation of a consensus on the UCC.
5. Impact on Minority Rights: Minority groups may feel threatened by the UCC in the sense that it could destroy their identity and rights. They might think that a uniform code will be dominated by the majority's values and norms, leading to the destruction of the minority's distinct cultural and religious practices.
6. Legal Problems: A move to the UCC would demand much change in the legal system. It would demand amendment to existing laws and enactment of new ones. This process might become complicated, time-consuming with possible lawsuits and disputes during the transition period.
7. Identity Loss of Community: Personal laws are generally seen as a very important aspect of a community's identity. A uniform code would strip this identity, as individuals would feel bound to a set of standardized rules that don't really reflect their unique cultural and religious practices
8. Religious Leaders' Opposition: Religious leaders and institutions are in a position to influence public opinion within their communities. A lot of religious leaders are likely to oppose the UCC as an attack on religious authority and traditions. Their opposition will mobilize large sections of their communities against the UCC, hence making its implementation difficult.
9. Historical Precedents: There have been earlier attempts at reform of personal laws that have been met with strong resistance. For example, the Shah Bano case in the 1980s: the Supreme Court declared the right of a Muslim divorced woman to alimony and the country erupted in a chorus of protests that eventually saw a law passed to nullify the court's decision.

India's Experience with Uniform Laws:

Uniform laws in India are shaped by the complexity of its social fabric, in which personal laws are very deeply rooted in religious, cultural, and regional traditions. Article 44 of the Indian Constitution aims to establish a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) for the country by standardizing laws that regulate personal matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption for all citizens, regardless of their religion. However, this code has been met with resistance as Indian society is heterogeneous and pluralistic.

In the case of Hindu personal law, the most important reforms occurred in the 1950s with the Hindu Code Bills. The acts and reforms, such as the Hindu Marriage Act, Hindu Succession Act, and the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, have reformed a large portion of traditional practices, such as giving better rights to women with respect to inheritance and property. In terms of divorce and inheritance, it was a massive stride towards gender equality among the Hindu population. However, it is still not applied in the case of other religions.

Muslim personal law, under Sharia, remains untouched by reforms, and triple talaq, instant divorce, and polygamy continue. The judiciary intervened in landmark cases, like the Shah Bano case of 1985, where the court asked for uniformity of standards of alimony. But political consequences meant that the judgment was reversed through the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act. The Supreme Court struck down triple talaq in 2017 as a major step towards gender justice.

While personal laws for different communities have remained distinct, there is an exception in the Goa Civil Code. This uniform civil code, inherited from Portuguese colonial law, has been applied uniformly to all the citizens of Goa irrespective of their religions. It remains a singular example of the UCC in practice in India and has been implemented only in a single state without being stretched nationwide.

The Indian experience with uniform laws best illustrates the problems of equality and respect for diversity. While some reforms have been successful in advancing gender equality, especially for Hindu women, applying a UCC to all religious communities has been met with resistance. The challenge lies in harmonizing legal reforms with the cultural and religious identities that define India's plural society. A national UCC would require broad consensus, gradual reforms, and careful consideration of how to preserve diversity while ensuring legal equality for all citizens.

Balancing Equality and Diversity

Balancing equality and diversity in the context of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is one of India's most complex constitutional challenges. Equality, as enshrined in Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, calls for a legal framework that eliminates discrimination and ensures justice for all citizens, irrespective of gender, religion, or community. Meanwhile, the country's rich cultural and religious diversity protected under Articles 25-28 embodies that pluralistic ethos that constitutes the bedrock of Indian identity.

In these personal matters, UCC intends to provide a uniform system of law, trying to balance the inequality often propagated under religion-based personal laws. Nonetheless, it has attracted so much resistance from society with apprehension that the given structure might demolish unique cultural norms that exist in minorities as well as tribes. To several minds, it is thought as an imposition of values which may ruin the texture of a pluralistic society. To balance this off, gender injustices would be addressed without disregarding cultural identities. A rigid UCC would alienate the communities, but a more flexible, phased approach where emphasis is on the elimination of the discriminatory practices within the personal laws could build trust and acceptability. Meaningful stakeholder dialogue, along with public education, could well place the benefits of UCC on the issues of justice and equality while respecting the diversity. India can harmonize these competing principles by adopting a sensitive and inclusive strategy, thereby ensuring that equality and diversity complement rather than conflict with each other.

Countries Having Uniform Civil Code:

• France: France has a uniform civil code, which is known as the Napoleonic Code. This applies to all citizens uniformly. This prevents personal laws from being influenced by religion and makes the laws secular and equal.
• Turkey: Turkey implemented a uniform civil code in the 1920s, as part of its modernization program under Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. The religious laws were replaced with secular laws to promote equality and national unity.
• United States: In the United States, marriage and divorce, which are considered personal issues, are covered under state laws that are more or less consistent throughout the state. Again, these are universal laws applying to everyone irrespective of the faith.

Uniform Civil Code Way Forward:

A balanced approach toward the implementation of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) would involve gradual reform in personal laws, inclusive consultations, gender justice focus, state-level UCC initiatives, and promotion of legal awareness for public support.

• Gradual Reforms in Personal Laws: Gradual reforms within existing personal laws might be more effective than an abrupt shift toward a UCC. For instance, provisions that amend discriminatory provisions in personal laws would reduce resistance and bring personal laws into constitutional values.
• Broad-Based Consultation: Developing a UCC would require consultation with all communities in order to ensure that cultural identity-related concerns are heard. Such an approach could reduce resistance and increase acceptance. Focus on Gender Justice and Rights: Any movement toward a UCC should, first and foremost, ensure equality for all, especially for women. Reforms that strengthen women's rights under the extant personal laws could lead to a UCC.
• State-Level UCC Plans: Permitting states to introduce a UCC locally would allow its effectiveness and acceptance to be tested. States like Goa and Uttarakhand have already introduced UCC, which could act as a model for other regions. Promote Legal Literacy and Awareness: Promoting the constitutional rights and gender justice can create public opinion and support for UCC. A more informed society would be more likely to understand and accept changes toward a unified legal system.

CONCLUSION

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is one of the most compelling conceptions of legal equality, justice, and national integration in India. It promises to put an end to disparities in personal laws, ensuring gender justice and reinforcing the secular fabric of the Constitution. However, its implementation should take into account the specific pluralism of Indian society, which is characterized by various religions, cultures, and customs. While it aligns with the constitutional ideal of equality under Article 14 and the directive principle under Article 44, the UCC also intersects with Articles 25-28, which protect religious freedom. This duality has necessitated a balanced approach: equality without cultural erasure. Implementing the UCC abruptly could alienate the minority and tribal communities, as mistrust and resistance to such a measure could increase. A gradual approach would include dialogue with stakeholders, targeted reforms in the existing personal laws, and large-scale awareness campaigns. In that way, broader acceptance would be easier. The Goa Civil Code provides a very limited but valuable precedent of how uniformity can go along with diversity.

It must be a tool for harmony rather than an instrument of imposing homogeneity on diversity, making the constitutional promise of equality real. By building consensus on legitimate concerns, India can aspire to bring into effect a UCC that represents its progressive aspirations along with its pluralistic heritage. The journey toward the Uniform Civil Code must be a journey of collaboration sensitivity, and respect for the rich cultural fabric defining the nation. 

.    .    .