Uniform Civil Code in India: What is Stopping its Implementation?

Lauded for its diversity by the world, India hosts 6 major religions, over 50 recognised tribal faiths, and hundreds of other smaller indigenous traditions within its territory. As a way of preserving this myriad of faiths, personal laws have prevailed in the fabric of our legal structure since colonial times. Acting as a set of regulations governing private matters on grounds of religion, its need, and subsequent impact on national unity and complications in legal administration were some of the many issues addressed by Dr Ambedkar while drafting the constitution post-independence. 

Illustration by The Geostrata

Dr Ambedkar, alongside many, felt that overriding the idea of religious laws would facilitate equality between genders and would lead to simplified adjudication in matters pertaining to private matters of marriage, inheritance, succession, and adoption. Although knowing that initiating the process of establishing a UCC so close to the aftermath of the partition would lead to widespread unrest and discontent, the idea of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) was incorporated as a Directive Principle of State Policy under Article 44 of the Indian Constitution.

It would be a comprehensive set of rules pertaining to marriage, succession, inheritance, and adoption, which would be uniformly applicable to all citizens of the nation, regardless of what is dictated by their religious beliefs.

A UCC aims to replace the current system of religion-governed personal laws in India on the grounds of equality, legal simplification, and national integration. In India, 3 (Goa, Uttarakhand, Gujarat) out of 28 states have implemented a UCC.

PROPONENTS OF THE IDEA OF UCC?

The idea of one uniform set of laws for all religions does have its own merits. To start with, it would simplify the adjudication of matters pertaining to marriage, succession, inheritance, and adoption in courts, hence boosting efficiency and speed.

With 6 religious codes recognised in India, it technically implies that individuals from all beliefs will be tried and adjudicated on the grounds of what their corresponding religion dictates. This does bring about immense complexity for the legal landscape in India. 

Advocating for a UCC in India is not limited to mere public sentiment. Voiced through many verdicts, the Supreme Court, on many occasions, has found itself standing at odds with personal laws, especially when they conflicted with basic human and fundamental rights. In Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India (2014), the petitioner sought the right to adopt children irrespective of religious personal laws. The petitioner challenged the inconsistency between the secular provisions of adoption in the Juvenile Justice Act (2000) and the restrictions placed on it under Muslim personal law. The Supreme Court held that adoption could be governed by the JJ Act regardless of personal laws, enabling Muslims to legally adopt children, further highlighting the broader need for a UCC in India.

Another complication arises when the applicability of religious laws is extended beyond the cadre of its practising members. In Satprakash Meena v. Alka Meena (2021), the Delhi High Court navigated the application of section 2(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act to members of scheduled tribes, in this case, to Alka Meena. The court ruled that even though Scheduled Tribes are generally excluded from the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 under section 2(2), its provisions can apply if the parties follow Hindu marriage customs like Saptapadi, as was done by Alka Meena. 

In Samiulla Khan v. Sirajuddin Macci (2025), the deceased and intestate Shehnaz Begum’s siblings were only given 1/3rd of her property, with the husband receiving 3/4th of it on the grounds of claiming that the property was purchased jointly. Despite him not being the legal heir, the verdict ruled that under the Sunni Hanafi law, given that the property was purchased through joint earnings, it was not an exclusive asset belonging to Shehnaz Begum. The Karnataka High Court, in the obiter dicta of the judicial pronouncement, advocated for a UCC if such inequalities in inheritance are to be mitigated. 

A similar sentiment is echoed in Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum & Ors as maintenance for divorced Muslim women beyond the prescribed 3-month iddat period by Muslim law was challenged. With respect to Section 144 (1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which orders maintenance for wives and their children to be paid by their husbands, the court ruled that it is applicable to all women in the country, irrespective of their religion. Hence, many argue that a UCC will help erase outdated laws, those which have been outpaced by social progress made thus far. Despite these fairly supported advantages, India struggles to garner national support for the same. 

WHY ARE WE UNABLE TO IMPLEMENT A UCC IN INDIA?

The critiques of a UCC in India are incredibly difficult to navigate as they deal with complex realities and contradictions in socio-legal landscapes. One of the main reasons why a common set of laws will not work in a country like India is that it is nearly impossible to formulate a set which would suit everyone. The only condition under which a UCC would be acceptable in India is if it somehow manages to accept, accommodate, and respect all communities and religions prevalent in the Indian social landscape. The majority population in India is unwilling to surrender their customs for secular rules; support is refused unless their own religions are represented in a suitable capacity. 

A major hurdle in the implementation of a UCC is the ongoing legal debate regarding its constitutional validity, for UCC finds itself at the conflicting cusp of two fundamental rights. If India were to consider aligning with UCC, it could potentially support the principle of equality before the law under Article 14. However, simultaneously, it may raise important questions regarding how cultural and religious diversity would be upheld within the framework of equal representation as prescribed by the constitution. This debate drives us to look at the particulars underscored by Article 25 of the Indian Constitution. 

Article 25 (1) of the Indian Constitution guarantees individuals the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, and health.

Although crucial, it is not a blanket, absolute right, with 25(2) permitting states to regulate secular activities associated with religious practice and enact social reforms. The constitution, hence, enables the state to extend social and political rights, reflecting not just the black letter of the law but the spirit of the law as well. This is the ideal framework within which a UCC would flourish in India. If, within the principle of equality, states are constitutionally permitted to enact any social reform laws, then a UCC cannot be declared to be unconstitutional. 

The hitch in its implementation, hence, deals with a dual inquiry, with one prong looking into its constitutionality, and the other prong looking into whether a UCC would violate religious freedom. Hence, it is an attempt to understand how the legal framework can be made inclusive and accommodative for all religions in a way which enables the establishment of fundamental rights to express freely, be equals before law, and have the liberty to lead life as pleased. This would further ensure that any state action depriving liberty must be fair, just, reasonable, and non-arbitrary, as established in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India. Hence, the golden triangle of law, Articles 19, 14, and 21, will be upheld rightfully.. 

Hence, the ongoing dilemma is an attempt to figure out if there is a way in which UCC could exist within the ongoing interpretative and socio-political debate surrounding its functioning. This dilemma is why, despite the existence of many judgments voicing the need for a uniform set of laws, it has proven difficult to formulate a framework covering all personal laws and not just a few limited aspects of it. 

Furthermore, personal laws fall under the concurrent list, allowing both state and union governments to legislate on the same. If there is to be a national framework for the same, another contention arises when we discuss the regional variations of these personal laws. For instance, the Hindu Law, which was codified in the 1950s, is not applicable in the same way throughout India, as seen in the Hindu Succession (Kerala Amendment) Act, 2015, which provides for different inheritance rules in Kerala. Such variations, although do not pose a threat to our federal structure, do raise questions about the scope and range of applicability of personal laws in India.  

Owing to the well-crafted federal structure prescribed by our constitution, there does exist a remedy for adjudication of such differences. Article 254 does clarify a rather important aspect in the administration of personal laws. If, during legislation on a matter under the concurrent list, there emerges a threat of a federal breakdown, the union law would prevail in case of conflict. Hence, if a UCC were to weaken the federal structure of the country due to contentions regarding any state legislation on the same, the union law can rightfully intervene. This serves as immense reassurance for those who worry of a UCC serving as a potential matter of contention between states and the union government. 

WHAT WOULD BE THE WAY AHEAD?

The complex debate of whether a UCC would suit India is a dynamic one. Its resolution would not be a possibility unless the many incomplete debates regarding the matter are settled. Be it the debate of its constitutionality or of its fair implementation, there do exist many questions pertaining to how we can adopt a structure that aligns with Dr. Ambedkar’s vision of a UCC, one which upholds the spirit of law through national unity, social justice, and gender equality. With states in India slowly walking the path of implementing a UCC in their own states, the reality of a nationally integrated UCC is surely no longer impossible or unimaginable.

---

BY VIJAYLAXMI

TEAM GEOSTRATA

info@thegeostrata.com