Uniform Civil Code: Harmonising Personal Laws or Threatening Diversity?

One of India’s contentious constitutional goals is the Uniform Civil Code. The Uniform Civil Code is inscribed in Article 44 of the Directive Principles of State Policy. The Uniform Civil Code asks the State to give every citizen a set of laws. It includes laws, on succession, inheritance, maintenance, marriage, divorce and adoption. The Uniform Civil Code aims to replace rules that come from religious traditions with a single code that provides consistency and equality. However, the UCC argument is much more complicated, touching on constitutional rights, religious identity, historical customs, and India’s commitment to pluralism, despite its ostensibly progressive goal.  The question of whether the UCC will promote social harmony or jeopardize India’s cultural variety is becoming more and more pertinent as the country develops politically and socially^[1].

The UCCs supporters say the UCC is a step, toward equality and gender justice. The personal laws still hurt women. The practice of talaq let a Muslim spouse end a marriage alone before the 2017 decision in Shayara Bano v. Union of India².  Hindu inheritance rules hurt girls before the 2005 amendment. Christian divorce rules also had parts until a court review forced changes. In my view the UCC is needed. By guaranteeing equal rights for all citizens, regardless of their religion, a consistent code aims to eradicate such gender-based discrepancies. Additionally, proponents contend that since all people would be subject to the same civil laws as they are under criminal and contract laws, a uniform code would promote national integration and reinforce secularism. They contend that a common civil framework fosters a sense of shared citizenship, streamlines the legal system, and lessens litigation resulting from competing personal laws^[2].

On other hand many people worry that the UCC may weaken the mix culture of India. Many cultures see rules, as parts of their faith. Personal rules link closely to identity, rituals and customs. People could see enforcing the UCC as an effort to uphold majority norms or to weaken autonomy. In light of Articles 25 to 28 which protect freedom, the issue, about the

UCC becomes more important. The critics say personal rules, in India vary among religions. The tribal tribes have laws. The Shia and Sunni interpretations of law exist. The Christian and Parsi communities have succession rules. The many Hindu rituals differ by area. It is hard to create a code that satisfies rules that are so different. The critics also argue that social transformation needs to be community driven and gradual. Without first fostering social consensus, abrupt legal changes may cause opposition and tensions among communities^[3].

Supreme Court decisions reflect the conflict between equality and religious freedom. In the Shah Bano case^[4] (1985) the Supreme Court expressed sorrow that India has not yet made a UCC. The Supreme Court gave support to a divorced woman, under Section 125 CrPC, a secular law. The Supreme Court again gave support to UCC in the Sarla Mudgal case^[5] (1995). The Sarla Mudgal case showed how personal laws were abused when Hindu men changed to Islam just to escape bigamy rules. Later, in John Vallamattom^[6] (2003), the Court emphasized the need for universal norms and overturned discriminatory measures that affected Christians.  The Shayara Bano⁸ ruling (2017) upheld the idea that personal legislation must respect basic rights, even though it had nothing to do with UCC.  Although critics point out that Goa’s distinct history makes it an exception rather than a universal norm, Goa’s civil code is frequently cited as an example of successful uniformity.

I often wonder what will happen to personal laws if the uniform civil code actually exists. The question, about personal laws and the uniform civil code is an issue that many people ignore in the UCC debate. In essence the uniform civil code would replace all laws that deal with civil disputes. The uniform civil code would make rules about family affairs that’re Hindu, Muslim, Christian Parsi, tribal or customary obsolete or would merge those rules into the uniform civil code. In my view the UCC will standardize customs. The UCC will standardize the Hindu Marriage Act, the Hindu Succession Act, the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, the Christian Marriage Act, the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act the Indian Succession Act, for some communities and many other laws.

The UCC would establish a procedure, for marriage ceremony, for legal requirements, for minimum age, for divorce and for registration steps in marriage matters. The UCC would impact religions in ways. Muslims would no longer follow nikah as a marriage with mahr criteria unless the UCC contains those provisions. Hindus would view the end of steps like saptapadi as the basis, for a legitimate marriage. Changes may also occur for Christians and Parsis, who presently adhere to differing denominational practices. The UCC would probably substitute common grounds like irretrievable breakdown, cruelty, abandonment, or mutual consent for a variety of religious grounds in divorce cases. Communities that now have stringent divorce laws, like Christians under the previous Divorce Act, will be greatly impacted by this^[7].

 Religious identification will no longer be a factor in maintenance under the UCC. Every spouse would be entitled to maintenance and alimony regardless of the community. Succession and inheritance laws would become the same. Succession and inheritance would follow one set of rules. A single distribution system would replace succession laws regulations, muslim rule on shares based on class heirs, Hindu coparcenary rights and customary tribal inheritance laws. This would result in a substantial change to Muslim personal law, which does not permit testamentary freedom like other laws.  This is a very delicate matter since tribes with their unique hereditary traditions can object to losing their independence¹⁰.

Adoption is another area where the UCC could have effects. Hindu law allows adoption, under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act. Muslim, Christian and Parsi personal laws do not recognize adoption. Muslim, Christian and Parsi personal laws only allow guardianship, under the Guardians and Wards Act. The UCC could create a right to adopt. The UCC could give equal adoption rights to all communities.

These changes show that while the UCC could bring equality the UCC could also change the cultural fabric of communities. Any effort to bring UCC must be done carefully with consultations and, with protection, for practices that do not break fundamental rights.

Uniform Civil Code is a hope and a problem. It wants to bring equality and updated law but the Uniform Civil Code also risks upsetting India’s mix of cultures. The best way for the Uniform Civil Code may not be forced sameness but gradual bringing together, changing rules in all laws while keeping good traditions. The focus should be on giving voice to all groups and writing a Uniform Civil Code that keeps rights safe while respecting all cultures. India’s strength lies in its ability to uphold both equality and pluralism, and any move toward the UCC must honour that constitutional vision.

[1] Numan Khan, Is UCC the Unity we aspire for in our Diversity? Judicial Academy Jharkhand https://jajharkhand.in/wp–content/uploads/2024/09/Is–UCC–the–Unity–we–aspire–for–in–our–Diversity.pdf ² Shayara Bano v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 2017 SC 4609.

[2] Vijay, Dhruv, Uniform Civil Code: Necessity or Threat to Diversity? Jus Corpus, May 30, 2025.

https://www.juscorpus.com/uniform–civil–code–necessity–or–threat–to–diversity/

[3] Nanthinisha J, Uniform civil code in India: Harmonizing diversity or fuelling discord, Vintage Legal (Jan. 29, 2024),https://www.vintagelegalvl.com/post/uniform–civil–code–in–india–harmonizing–diversity–or–fuellingdiscord

[4] Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, 1985 AIR 9945.

[5] Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India, AIR 1995 SC 1531.

[6] John Vallamattom v. Union of India,AIR 2003 SC 2902. ⁸ Shayara Bano v. Union of India, AIR 2017 SC 4609.

[7] Numan Khan, Is UCC the Unity we aspire for in our Diversity? Judicial Academy Jharkhand https://jajharkhand.in/wp–content/uploads/2024/09/Is–UCC–the–Unity–we–aspire–for–in–our–Diversity.pdf ¹⁰ Supra note 9.

Uniform Civil Code: Harmonising Personal Laws or Threatening

                                      By: – Deeksha Singh

One of India’s contentious constitutional goals is the Uniform Civil Code. The Uniform Civil Code is inscribed in Article 44 of the Directive Principles of State Policy. The Uniform Civil Code asks the State to give every citizen a set of laws. It includes laws, on succession, inheritance, maintenance, marriage, divorce and adoption. The Uniform Civil Code aims to replace rules that come from religious traditions with a single code that provides consistency and equality. However, the UCC argument is much more complicated, touching on constitutional rights, religious identity, historical customs, and India’s commitment to pluralism, despite its ostensibly progressive goal.  The question of whether the UCC will promote social harmony or jeopardize India’s cultural variety is becoming more and more pertinent as the country develops politically and socially^[1].

The UCCs supporters say the UCC is a step, toward equality and gender justice. The personal laws still hurt women. The practice of talaq let a Muslim spouse end a marriage alone before the 2017 decision in Shayara Bano v. Union of India².  Hindu inheritance rules hurt girls before the 2005 amendment. Christian divorce rules also had parts until a court review forced changes. In my view the UCC is needed. By guaranteeing equal rights for all citizens, regardless of their religion, a consistent code aims to eradicate such gender-based discrepancies. Additionally, proponents contend that since all people would be subject to the same civil laws as they are under criminal and contract laws, a uniform code would promote national integration and reinforce secularism. They contend that a common civil framework fosters a sense of shared citizenship, streamlines the legal system, and lessens litigation resulting from competing personal laws^[2].

On other hand many people worry that the UCC may weaken the mix culture of India. Many cultures see rules, as parts of their faith. Personal rules link closely to identity, rituals and customs. People could see enforcing the UCC as an effort to uphold majority norms or to weaken autonomy. In light of Articles 25 to 28 which protect freedom, the issue, about the

UCC becomes more important. The critics say personal rules, in India vary among religions. The tribal tribes have laws. The Shia and Sunni interpretations of law exist. The Christian and Parsi communities have succession rules. The many Hindu rituals differ by area. It is hard to create a code that satisfies rules that are so different. The critics also argue that social transformation needs to be community driven and gradual. Without first fostering social consensus, abrupt legal changes may cause opposition and tensions among communities^[3].

Supreme Court decisions reflect the conflict between equality and religious freedom. In the Shah Bano case^[4] (1985) the Supreme Court expressed sorrow that India has not yet made a UCC. The Supreme Court gave support to a divorced woman, under Section 125 CrPC, a secular law. The Supreme Court again gave support to UCC in the Sarla Mudgal case^[5] (1995). The Sarla Mudgal case showed how personal laws were abused when Hindu men changed to Islam just to escape bigamy rules. Later, in John Vallamattom^[6] (2003), the Court emphasized the need for universal norms and overturned discriminatory measures that affected Christians.  The Shayara Bano⁸ ruling (2017) upheld the idea that personal legislation must respect basic rights, even though it had nothing to do with UCC.  Although critics point out that Goa’s distinct history makes it an exception rather than a universal norm, Goa’s civil code is frequently cited as an example of successful uniformity.

I often wonder what will happen to personal laws if the uniform civil code actually exists. The question, about personal laws and the uniform civil code is an issue that many people ignore in the UCC debate. In essence the uniform civil code would replace all laws that deal with civil disputes. The uniform civil code would make rules about family affairs that’re Hindu, Muslim, Christian Parsi, tribal or customary obsolete or would merge those rules into the uniform civil code. In my view the UCC will standardize customs. The UCC will standardize the Hindu Marriage Act, the Hindu Succession Act, the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, the Christian Marriage Act, the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act the Indian Succession Act, for some communities and many other laws.

The UCC would establish a procedure, for marriage ceremony, for legal requirements, for minimum age, for divorce and for registration steps in marriage matters. The UCC would impact religions in ways. Muslims would no longer follow nikah as a marriage with mahr criteria unless the UCC contains those provisions. Hindus would view the end of steps like saptapadi as the basis, for a legitimate marriage. Changes may also occur for Christians and Parsis, who presently adhere to differing denominational practices. The UCC would probably substitute common grounds like irretrievable breakdown, cruelty, abandonment, or mutual consent for a variety of religious grounds in divorce cases. Communities that now have stringent divorce laws, like Christians under the previous Divorce Act, will be greatly impacted by this^[7].

 Religious identification will no longer be a factor in maintenance under the UCC. Every spouse would be entitled to maintenance and alimony regardless of the community. Succession and inheritance laws would become the same. Succession and inheritance would follow one set of rules. A single distribution system would replace succession laws regulations, muslim rule on shares based on class heirs, Hindu coparcenary rights and customary tribal inheritance laws. This would result in a substantial change to Muslim personal law, which does not permit testamentary freedom like other laws.  This is a very delicate matter since tribes with their unique hereditary traditions can object to losing their independence¹⁰.

Adoption is another area where the UCC could have effects. Hindu law allows adoption, under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act. Muslim, Christian and Parsi personal laws do not recognize adoption. Muslim, Christian and Parsi personal laws only allow guardianship, under the Guardians and Wards Act. The UCC could create a right to adopt. The UCC could give equal adoption rights to all communities.

These changes show that while the UCC could bring equality the UCC could also change the cultural fabric of communities. Any effort to bring UCC must be done carefully with consultations and, with protection, for practices that do not break fundamental rights.

Uniform Civil Code is a hope and a problem. It wants to bring equality and updated law but the Uniform Civil Code also risks upsetting India’s mix of cultures. The best way for the Uniform Civil Code may not be forced sameness but gradual bringing together, changing rules in all laws while keeping good traditions. The focus should be on giving voice to all groups and writing a Uniform Civil Code that keeps rights safe while respecting all cultures. India’s strength lies in its ability to uphold both equality and pluralism, and any move toward the UCC must honour that constitutional vision.

[1] Numan Khan, Is UCC the Unity we aspire for in our Diversity? Judicial Academy Jharkhand https://jajharkhand.in/wp–content/uploads/2024/09/Is–UCC–the–Unity–we–aspire–for–in–our–Diversity.pdf ² Shayara Bano v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 2017 SC 4609.

[2] Vijay, Dhruv, Uniform Civil Code: Necessity or Threat to Diversity? Jus Corpus, May 30, 2025.

https://www.juscorpus.com/uniform–civil–code–necessity–or–threat–to–diversity/

[3] Nanthinisha J, Uniform civil code in India: Harmonizing diversity or fuelling discord, Vintage Legal (Jan. 29, 2024),https://www.vintagelegalvl.com/post/uniform–civil–code–in–india–harmonizing–diversity–or–fuellingdiscord

[4] Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, 1985 AIR 9945.

[5] Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India, AIR 1995 SC 1531.

[6] John Vallamattom v. Union of India,AIR 2003 SC 2902. ⁸ Shayara Bano v. Union of India, AIR 2017 SC 4609.

[7] Numan Khan, Is UCC the Unity we aspire for in our Diversity? Judicial Academy Jharkhand https://jajharkhand.in/wp–content/uploads/2024/09/Is–UCC–the–Unity–we–aspire–for–in–our–Diversity.pdf ¹⁰ Supra note 9.