UCC (Uniform Civil Code)

Abstract

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in the Indian constitutional law, mentioned in Article 44 of the Indian Constitution, is a Directive Principle of State Policy. The aim create a single set of laws for all citizen, apart from their Religions, regarding personal matters like marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption, replacing religion-based personal laws to promote national unity, secularism, and gender equality. In this quality of analysis, we studied how the other countries have implemented the Uniform Civil Code. For example, countries like

France, Germany, and Japan have a Uniform Civil Code that applies to all citizens, regardless of their religion or beliefs. In this study, I have also examined the benefits and the negative impact of the Uniform Civil Code. The Uniform Civil Code promotes gender equality, supports national integration, and provides equal status to all citizens. However, we have faced challenges in implementing the Uniform Civil Code, such as Practical difficulties due to diversity in India. Perception of UCC as encroachment on religious freedom, Interference of states in personal matters. Significant implementation of UCC in states like Goa and

Uttarakhand, where Uttarakhand became the first state in India to implement the UCC in 2024, after independence. Ultimately, this research offers a comprehensive analysis of UCC’s role in modern India.

Introduction

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a concept in Indian constitutional law that aims to replace personal laws based on religious traditions with a common set of laws governing various aspects of civil life, such as marriage, divorce, adoption, and inheritance. The objective behind the UCC is to promote gender equality, secularism, and the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. The UCC (Uniform Civil Code) is mentioned in Article 44 and Part IV of the Constitution of India.

Article 44 requires the state to strive to secure for citizens of India a uniform civil code throughout India.

An objection was taken to this provision in the constituent Assembly by several Muslim members who apprehended that their personal law might be abrogated. This objection was met by pointing out:

(i) That India had already achieved a uniformity of law over a vast area;

(ii) That through there was diversity in personal laws, there was nothing sacrosanct about them;

(iii) The secular activities, such as, inheritance, covered by personal laws should be separated from religion;

(iv) That a uniform law applicable to all would promote national unity; and

(v) That no legislature would forcibly amend any personal any personal law in future if people were opposed to it.

In this connection, reference may also be made to the discussion under Art. 25 which guarantees freedom of conscience and profession, practice and propagation of religion. However, secular activity associated with religious practice is exempted form this guarantee.

It could, therefore, plausibly be argued that personal laws pertain to secular activities and hence fall within the regulatory power of the state.

Not much progress has so far been made towards achieving the ideal of a uniform civil code. Which still remains a distant dreams. The only tangible steps taken in this direction has been the codification and secularisation of Hindu Law. The codification of Muslim Law still

remains a sensitive matter through enlightened Muslim opinion appears to favour such steps.

It is necessary that the law be divorced form religion. With the enactment of a uniform code, secularism will be strengthened; much of the present-day separation and divisiveness between the various religion groups in the country will disappear, and India will emerge as a much more cohesive and integrated nation.

Several countries have implemented the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) that applies one set of personal laws to all citizens, but it is rare for a country that have a perfect UCC. For examples

 Countries with a Uniform Civil Code - Turkey, Egypt, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Indonesia are frequently cited as having a UCC.

 Countries with aspects of uniformity: France, Germany, and Japan have a uniform civil code that applies to all citizens, regardless of their religion or beliefs.

 In India, there are two states currently having Uniform Civil Codes: Uttarakhand and Goa. Uttarakhand was the first state to implement the Uniform Civil Code. It was adapted on January 27.2025. The code aims to standardise the personal laws of all citizens, except for the Scheduled Tribes.

 Goa has had UCC since 1961, based on the Portuguese Civil Code of 1867, which deals with matters like marriage, divorce, and inheritance for all its citizens, irrespective of their religion.

 It is also important to note that other states, like Gujarat, have formed committees to study or implement a UCC, but Uttarakhand is the only one to have fully implemented one after Goa.

Benefits of having UCC

1. To provide equal status to all citizens.

2. To promote gender equality.

3. To accommodate the aspirations of the young population.

4. To support the national integration.

5. To bypass the contentious issues of reform of existing personal laws. 5

Negative Impact of UCC

1. Practical difficulties due to diversity in India.

2. Perception of UCC as encroachment on religious freedom.

3. Interference of states in personal matters.

4. Sensitive and tough task.

5. Time is not yet suitable for this reform.

Problems and Challenges in Implementing

1. Resistance from different religious communities to UCC in India –

Resistance is particularly pronounced in communities that fear a dilution of their distinct cultural and legal traditions. The Muslim Community, governed by the Sharia Law, has been a focal point of resistance. The fear of diluting Islamic principles and the apprehension that a UCC might impact minority rights within the broader framework fuel this resistance. Moreover, the issue of majoritarian imposition adds another layer of complexity. The Hindu majority’s support for the UCC might be viewed with suspicion by religious minorities, leading to heightened resistance. Muslims are now opposing the latest modifications to the UCC's implementation in Assam, as the chief minister of Assam has taken action to end underage weddings by abolishing the Muslim Marriage Act.

2. Political challenges –

The 22nd Law Commission of India took up the idea of UCC and sought opinions on its implementation in India, which led to debates and criticism by many writers and legal workers. Implementation requires a strong political will and leadership. Policymakers need to navigate through the diverse political landscape and take decisive actions, often risking potential backlash from different interest groups. But this is where the problem lies. Political parties often align their stances based on religious lines to secure support from specific religious communities. Advocating for UCC might be perceived as a risk, potentially alienating certain voter bases.

3. Legal Challenges –

The question of having UCC in India has led to many articles regarding India moving towards majoritarianism, in which the Hindu Community will lead the Civil Code, and this imposes a certain threat to the implementation of UCC in India. Also, many believe that UCC will directly infringe the freedom of religion mentioned in the Indian Constitution. The interpretation and application of existing personal laws based

on religion vary. People who are in the habit of following their laws will find it difficult to follow the same civil code, which will not be based on their religion. This means that there is a lack of awareness and education in many regions about the aspects of the Uniform Civil Code in India.

4. Doctrinal Differences –

In India, several religious communities have created their own laws based on their own set of beliefs. They could object to the establishment of a UCC if they believe that it will compromise their traditions and religious freedom. Muslim organisations, for instance, have long opposed a UCC, claiming that it would conflict with Islamic Shariah law, which governs Muslims' personal affairs.

Certain Hindu organisations contend that the unification and uniqueness of Hindu personal laws will be compromised by the establishment of a UCC. Hindu personal laws now govern things including marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption; these groups support the preservation of Hindu traditions and practices in these areas.

5. Mixed Public Opinion –

India's public views on the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) are as varied as the nation itself. It is evident from several polls and research that the UCC provokes a variety of responses, many of which are impacted by political opinions, socioeconomic background, religious affiliation, and degree of education. Numerous polls show that people's opinions of the UCC are mixed. A sizeable minority opposes the UCC, seeing it as an attack on religious freedom and cultural variety, even if a sizable

section of the public favours its adoption as a step toward gender equity and national unity. Religious differences frequently cause this split, with minority groups expressing greater hostility to the UCC than does the dominant society. There is a need for extensive public awareness and education regarding the UCC. Misinformation or lack of understanding can contribute to resistance, making it essential to communicate the rationale and benefits of a uniform civil code effectively. Navigating and addressing these challenges is a great task for the government as it requires a nuanced approach, involving extensive dialogue, education and a commitment to upholding constitutional principles. However, there are many arguments that are in favour of implementing UCC in India, including the Law Commission, News Articles, etc.

Remedies:

The remedies below aim to balance the need for legal uniformity with respect for India's cultural and religious diversity, ensuring that the transition to a UCC is as smooth and inclusive as possible.

1. Gradual and Incremental Implementation:

One of the key remedies might be the suggestion to implement the UCC

gradually rather than all at once. This approach would allow for a phased

introduction of uniform laws, beginning with less contentious areas of civil law, and gradually expanding to cover more sensitive areas like marriage and inheritance. This incremental approach could help ease the transition and reduce resistance from various communities.

2. Dialogue and Consensus-Building:

Another essential remedy is fostering dialogue and building consensus among different stakeholders, including religious leaders, community representatives, legal experts, and policymakers. By engaging in an open and inclusive dialogue, it’s possible to address the concerns of minority communities and find common ground. The article likely emphasises the importance of transparent discussions to create a

UCC that respects religious freedoms while promoting equality and justice.

3. Uniformity with Flexibility:

The article might propose a model of UCC that includes a degree of flexibility to accommodate certain religious practices that do not conflict with the broader principles of equality and justice. This could involve allowing some exemptions or special provisions within the UCC to respect religious sentiments, while still upholding fundamental rights and ensuring gender justice.

4. Judicial and Legislative Collaboration:

The article likely suggests closer collaboration between the judiciary and the legislature in framing and implementing the UCC. The judiciary’s role could be to identify discriminatory practices in existing personal laws, while the legislature could work on drafting a UCC that eliminates these disparities. Collaborative efforts would ensure that the UCC is both legally sound and socially acceptable.

5. Public Awareness and Education:

Raising public awareness about the benefits of a UCC and educating people on how it would improve their rights and lives is another crucial remedy. The article might advocate for comprehensive awareness campaigns to demystify the UCC, dispel fears, and highlight its potential for promoting gender equality and national unity. Such campaigns could involve educational programs, media outreach, and community discussions.

6. Pilot Projects and Testing:

Implementing pilot projects in certain regions or communities to test the effectiveness of a UCC before nationwide implementation could be a pragmatic remedy. These pilot programs would allow for the identification of potential issues and the refinement of the UCC in a controlled environment, thereby reducing the risk of widespread resistance or unrest.

7. Incorporation of Best Practices:

The article might suggest studying and incorporating best practices from other countries that have successfully implemented similar legal reforms. Learning from international experiences, while adapting solutions to the Indian context, could provide valuable insights and strategies for implementing the UCC effectively.

8. Strengthening Secularism:

The article may emphasise the need to strengthen the secular foundations of the Indian state to support the implementation of the UCC. This could involve reinforcing the principle that the state does not favour any particular religion and ensuring that the UCC is seen as a secular legal reform aimed at promoting equality rather than an

attack on religious practices.

9. Protecting Minority Rights:

Ensuring that the UCC does not infringe on the rights of minority communities is a critical remedy. The article likely discusses ways to protect these rights within the framework of the UCC, possibly through constitutional safeguards or legal provisions that prevent the UCC from being used to marginalise or oppress any community.

10. Legal Reforms and Standardisation:

Finally, the article might advocate for broader legal reforms to standardise civil laws across the country, even before the full implementation of the UCC. These reforms could focus on harmonising existing personal laws to reduce disparities and conflicts, thereby laying the groundwork for a more comprehensive UCC in the future.

CASE LAWS

Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum 11 (1985)

The Supreme Court has ruled that a Muslim husband is liable to pay maintenance to the divorced wife beyond the iddat period. The Court has regretted that Art. 44 has remained a “dead letter” as there is “no evidence of any official activity for framing a common civil code of the country”. The court has emphasised: “A common civil code will help the cause of national integration by removing disparate loyalties to laws

which have conflicting ideologies”.

The Court appreciate the difficulties involved in bringing persons of different faiths and persuasions on a common platform, but, nevertheless, the Court has said, “a beginning has to be made if the Constitution is to have any meaning.” “It is the state which is charged with the duty of securing a uniform civil code for the citizens of the

country and, unquestionably, it has the legislative competence to do so.”

In the absence of such a code and the inaction of the legislatures to enforce laws, the role of the law reformer has to be assumed by the Court itself because “it is beyond the endurance of sensitive minds to allow injustice to be suffered when it is so palpable.”

Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017) 12

Ms Shayara Bano and her husband, Mr Rizwan Ahmed, got married in April 2002 in Uttar Pradesh. Ms Bano claimed that her husband ‘compelled’ her family to give dowry for the marriage. She stated that her husband and his family drugged, abused, and eventually abandoned her while she was sick, when her family could not provide

additional dowry.

In October 2015, Mr Ahmed divorced Ms Bano through the practice of talaq-e-biddat, also known as instantaneous triple talaq. Talaq-e-biddat is a religious practice that allows a man to divorce his wife instantly by saying the word ‘talaq’ thrice. The practice does not require the wife’s consent.

Ms Bano filed a writ petition at the Supreme Court in February 2016, challenging the constitutionality of talaq-e-biddat, polygamy, and nikah-halala. Polygamy, as an Islamic religious practice, allows men to marry more than one woman at a time. If a Muslim woman wants to remarry their first husband following a divorce, nikah- halala requires them to first marry and subsequently divorce her second husband.

Ms Bano claimed that these practices violate the Right to Equality, the Right against Discrimination, and the Right to Livelihood. She further argued that these practices were not protected by the Right to Freedom of Religion—religious freedom is subject to other fundamental rights, public order, morality, and health.

On February 16th, 2017, the SC directed the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), the Union Government, and women’s rights groups such as the Bebaak Collective and the Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, to give written submissions addressing the matter. All of these groups, besides the AIMPLB, filed submissions in support of Ms Bano.

While the AIMPLB conceded that Shariat strongly condemns the practice of talaq-e-biddat, they argued that the Court could not review uncodified Muslim personal law. They further argued that these practices were essential to Islam and protected by the Right to Freedom of Religion.

On March 30th, 2017, the SC created a 5-Judge Constitution Bench to hear the matter. The Bench comprised Chief Justice J.S. Khehar and Justices Kurian Joseph, R.F. Nariman, U.U. Lalit and Abdul Nazeer. The Bench heard the case between May 11th and May 19th, 2017, and delivered the Judgment on August 22nd, 2017. In a 3:2 split, the majority held that the practice of talaq-e-biddat was ‘manifestly arbitrary’ and unconstitutional. Chief Justice Khehar and Justice Nazeer dissented, stating that talaq- e-biddat was protected by the Right to Religion and that it was the job of Parliament to frame a law to govern the practice.

Two years later, in July, Parliament enacted the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, which made the practice of talaq-e-biddat a criminal act, punishable with up to three years imprisonment. The Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind, Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema, and the President of the Rashtriya UlemaCouncil challenged this Act in separate petitions at the Supreme Court in August 2019. However, the Court is yet to begin hearing arguments in the matter.

Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995)

The Supreme Court has directed the Prime Minister to take a fresh look at Article 44 of the Constitution, which enjoins the state to secure a uniform civil code which, accordingly to the Court, is imperative for both protection of the oppressed and promotion of national unity and integrity. The Court directed the Union Government through the Secretary to the Minister of Law and Justice, to file an affidavit by August 1995 indicating the steps taken and efforts made by the Government towards securing a uniform civil code for the citizens of India.

The above direction was given by the Court while dealing with a case where the question for consideration was whether a Hindu husband married under Hindu law, after conversion to Islam, without dissolving the first marriage, would be illegal, and the husband could be prosecuted for bigamy under Section 494 of the Indian Penal

Code.

In this case, four petitions were filed.

The First petition was filed by a registered society working for the welfare of women as a public interest litigation.

The Second petition was filed by Meena Mathur. She contended that she was married to one Jitendra in 1978 and they had three children out of wedlock. In 1998, her husband solemnised a second marriage with one Sunita Narula, alias Fatima, after they converted to Islam.

The Third petition case, Sunita Narula alias Fatima, contended that marrying Jitendra Mathur had again reverted to Hinduism and leaving his first wife. Her grievance was that she still continues to be a Muslim but is not being maintained by her husband and has no protection under either of the personal laws.

In the fourth case, petition Gita Rani contended that she was married to one Pradeep Kumar according to Hindu rites in 1998. In 1991, she came to know that her husband had run away with one Deepa and after converting to Islam, married her.

The Fourth petition Sushmita Ghosh contended in the court that she was married to G. C. Ghosh according to Hindu rites in 1984, but in 1992 her husband told her that he did not like her and he would embrace Islam and marry one Vinita prayed that her husband be restrained form entering into second marriage with Vinita Gupta.

On the facts of the cases, the Court held – A Hindu marriage continues to exist even after one of the spouse has converted to Islam. There is no automatic dissolution of Hindu marriage. It can only be dissolved by a decree of divorce on any of the grounds mentioned in Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The second marriage of Hindu after his conversion to Islam is void in terms of Section 494 IPC and the husband is liable to be prosecuted for bigamy. As regards the question of “Uniform Civil Code” the division Bench (Kuldip Singh and R.M. Sahai, JJ) in their separate but concurrent judgements held that since 1950 a number of Governments had come and gone but they had failed to make any efforts towards implementing the constitutional mandate under Art. 44 of the constitution. Consequently the problem today is that many Hindu have changed their religion and have converted to Islam only for the purpose of escaping the consequence of bigamy. This is so because Muslim Law permits more than one wife and to the extent of four. 14

Kuldip Singh, J., said that Art. 44 is based on the concept that there is no necessary connection between religious and personal law permits in civilised society. Marriage, succession and like matters are of secular nature and therefore, they can be regulated by law. No religion permits deliberate distortions, the judges declared. Much apprehension prevails about bigamy in Islam itself. In many Islamic countries have codified their personal law to check its abuse.

He pointed out that even in America it has been judicially acclaimed that the practise of polygamy is injurious to “public morals” even through some religion may make it obligatory or desirable for its followers. It can be regulated by the State just it can prohibit human sacrifice or the practice of Sati in the interest of public order.

The Court, while hearing an appeal filed by one of the accused in the above case, clarified that its descriptions were given by Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh who had directed the Government to take immediate steps for implementing the mandate of Art. 44 of the constitution.

The Supreme Court has emphasized that steps be initiated to enact a uniform civil code as, envigased by Art. 44. Reviewing the various laws prevailing in the area of marriage in India.

The Court has said in Ms. Jordan Diengdeh v. S.S. Chopra (1985) 15 : “…the law relating to judicial separation, divorce and nullity of marriage is far, far from uniform. Surely the time has now for a complete reform of the law of marriage and make a uniform law applicable to all people irrespective of religious or caste… We suggest that the time has come for the intervention of the legislature in these matters to provide for a uniform code of marriage and divorce….”

In Danial Latif v. Union of India (1997), 16 the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 and held that Muslim divorced Women has right to maintenance even after iddat period under the 1986 Act. The Court said that a Muslim husband is liable to make reasonable and fair provision for the future of the divorced

wife which clearly extends beyond the iddat period in terms of Section 3(1)(a) of the Act. Also, a divorced women who has not remarried and who is not able to maintain herself after iddat period can proceed as provided under Section 4 of the Act against her relations who are liable to maintain her in proportion of the properties which they may inherit on her death according to Muslim Law from such divorced women

including her children and parents. If the relatives are found unable to pay her maintenance the Magistrate may direct the State WakfBoard established under the Wakf Act to pay such maintenance.

John Vallamatton v. Union of India (2003) 17

In this case three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court consisting of C.J. V.N. Khare, S.B. Sinha and Dr. A.R. Lakshmanan, JJ., has once again expressed regret for non enactment of Common Civil Code. In the instant case the petitioners have challenged the validity of Section 118 of the Indian Succession Act on the ground that it was discriminatory under Article 14 as well as violative of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. Section 118 of the Act imposed restriction on a Christian having nephew or a niece or any other relative as regards his power to bequeath his property for religious or charitable purposes. The definition in the Act did not include wife of a testator as near relative while an adopted son was included as a relative.

So a Christian testator having a nephew or niece must execute the will at least 12 months before his death and deposit it within 6 months otherwise the bequest for religious or charitable use would be void. This restriction did not apply to a person having wife. The court held that Section 118 of the Sucession Act is unconstitutional being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The majority said that Articles 25

and 26 have no application in this case as disposition of property for religious and charitable uses is not an integral part of Christian religion. Articles 25 and 26 only protect those rituals and ceremonies that are integral part of religion. The Chief Justice of India in view of the facts of the instant case forcefully reiterated the view that the Common Civil Code be enacted as it would solve such problems.

He said, Article 44 is based on the premise that there is no necessary connection between religion and personal law in a civilized society.& Article 25 of the Constitution confers freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion. The aforesaid two provisions viz. Articles 25 and 44 show that former guarantees religious freedom whereas the latter divests religion from social relations and personal law. It is no matter of doubt that marriage, succession

and the like matters of a secular character cannot be brought within the guarantee enshrined under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. It is a matter of regret that Article 44 of the Constitution has not been given effect to. A Common Civil Code will enhance the cause of national integration by removing the contradictions based on ideologies.

Implementation of Uniform Civil Code in Goa

Goa is the first state where a uniform civil code implemented in India. After India annexed Goa in the year 1867, the existing Portuguese Civil Code, 1867 was not altered. It applies to all the Goan living in the state irrespective of their religion. This is an exceptional as no other state has adopted a common civil code. The Portuguese introduced the system of common set of laws for all hindus, Christians, muslims and

parsis under the Portuguese Civil Code of 1867.

Key significance brought by the Portuguese Rule :-

1. Common set of Laws for all religion.

2. Registration of Marriage was made compulsory.

3. All Assets acquired after marriage treated as joint-property of husband and wife.

4. Recognizing Divorce.

5. Equal Inheritance rights.

But Goa was later liberated by the Indian Armed forces in 1961, after which the government passed Goa, Daman and Diu Administration Act 1962 which followed the same Portuguese style of rule. The Portuguese laid the road for the current UCC, which is not a concept introduced by the Indian Government, but a system started by the Portugues.

Marriages: the registration of marriages is made compulsory under the Goan code so that dispute which may arise can be resolved by the law. Consent of men and women is required before marriage. The Goan code allows for a prenuptial agreement which can alter the ration of the distribution of assests.

Special Marriage Act, 1954

The Special Marriage Act was enacted in India to govern the marriages of two people from different religions. This law is applicable throughout India and governs the divorce of such marriages as well. However, in Goa, this act applies differently. Muslim men whose marriages are required do not have the right to polygamy in Goa.

The property and wealth owned by each spouse are equally divided amongst the spouses during the course of the marriage. In the case if divorce, each spouse is entitled to half of the property and in the case of

death of both the spouses, the property is equally divided amongst the surviving members.

Salient features of the Goan UCC :-

1. Religion, Marriage, Inheritance, Property Rights and Adoption are the major things that comes under the concept of personal laws.

2. In goa, irrespective of religion, it is applied in an uniform and equal manner to all its people.

Marriage Laws in Goa:-

(a) Compulsory Registration :- In Goa, Marriage must be compulsorily registered by a Civil Registrar. The people can follow their own customs and rituals as per their traditions but it will be held valid only if it is properly registered.

(b) Monogamy Rule:- In Goa, Bigamy or polygamy is not allowed. But in Hindu religion, a second marriage is allowed if :-

1. The wife does not deliver a child by the age of 21.

2. The wife does not deliver a male child by the age of 30. This provision is technically outdated and was criticized.

(c) Property rights:- The properties will be shared equally by men and women. No one can sell the property or mortgage it without the knowledge of the other person and if any one of them dies, the property will be equally divided between their heirs. Unlike the rest of India, Muslims cannot practice Polygamy or unilateral divorce (Talaq).

Interfaith Marriages:- Interfaith marriages are considered legally valid and it doesn’t require any specific laws like the Special Marriage Act ,1954 like for the rest of India but it should be registered.

 How far so has the Uniform Civil Code been Successful in Goa. 19

The application of UCC in Goa may seem like a success but the uniformity of laws in Goa has not translated into equality in every aspect. Certain provisions of the Portuguese civil code applied on the basis of religion are not fully uniform. The Report No. 21 titled as the “Protection of Institution of Marriage Bill 2012” of the Goa Law Commission (April 2009-March 2012) highlights the “concordata” which is the treaty signed in 1940 between the King of Portugal and the Pope, the Catholics takes away the civil jurisdiction of the court in the matters of separation, annulment of marriage. The High court merely have the authority of conveying the decrees of the Canonical Court to the Civil Registration for recording the dissolution of marriage in

the Marriage Register maintained by the Civil Registration.

1. Although the registration of marriage is made compulsory under the Act, the religious ceremony is given more importance and considered as marriage. The registration of marriage is only seen as a formality for most.

2. Although the registration of marriage is made compulsory under the Act, the religious Hindu men under some circumstances under Codes of Usages and Customs of Gentile Hindus of Goa, if the wife fails to deliver a child by the age of 25, or if she fails to deliver a male child by the age of 30.

3. The 1880 Code of Usages and Customs of Gentile Hindus gives civil effects to marriages according to religious rites. This code also allows the other non- Christians to follow their customs and rites within public order within public order and morality. This code also permits adoption procedures to Hindus and not to other communities.

4. The main aim to adopt UCC was for secularism and to separate the activities of state form religion, however, in Goa, there is no separation of church from state. The church law is followed for solemnizing marriages and the church has the authority to annual the marriage at the instance of one of the parties.

Landmark Case on Uniform Civil Code in Goa

Jose Paulo Coutinho v. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira (2019) 20

The primary issue in this case was whether the succession of property situated outside of Goa, belonging to a Goan domicile, would be governed by the Portuguese Civil Code of 1867or the Indian Succession Act of 1925.

One Joaquim Mariano Pereira (JMP) had three daughters viz., (1) Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira (ML), Respondent No.1 (2) Virginia Pereira and (3) Maria Augusta Antoneita Pereira Fernandes. He also had a wife named Claudina Lacerda Pereira. He lived in Bombay and purchased a property in Bombay in the year 1955. On 06.05.1957 he bequeathed this property at Bombay to his youngest daughter, Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira, Respondent No.1. He bequeathed Rs. 3000/each to his other

two daughters. His wife expired on 31.10.1960 when he was still alive. JMP died on 02.08.1967. The probate of the Will dated 06.05.1957 was granted by the High Court of Bombay, at Goa on 12.09.1980. Both the other daughters were served notice of the probate proceedings.

Therefore, the Court held that, all the properties of a Goan Domicile, regardless of whether they are situated within or outside of Goa, will be governed by the Portuguese Civil Code, and further held that the Domiciles of Goa will not be governed by section 5 of the Indian Succession Act. Therefore, the Court held that the property situated in Bombay was to be included in the inventory of properties in the inventory proceedings at Goa.

Implementation of Uniform Civil Code in Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand became the first Indian state post-independence to enact its own Uniform Civil Code (UCC), officially implementing it in January 27,2025.  its constitutional basis in Article 44 of the Indian Constitution. At a function in Dehradun, Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami launched a portal for the mandatory online registration of marriages, divorce, and live-in relationships.

According to the state government’s portal, the Uttarakhand UCC Rules “establish a comprehensive legal framework aimed at unifying personal laws related to marriage, divorce, inheritance, adoption and succession for all citizens of Uttarakhand, irrespective of religion or community”. The Rules also apply to the residents of Uttarakhand who live outside the state, and also hold good for cases in which one of the partners is a foreign national and the other a resident of Uttarakhand, the Rules stated.

Salient Features of UCC in Uttarakhand

1. Prohibition of polygamy and bigamy.

2. Banned Practices: Prohibits halala, iddat, and talaq from Muslim Personal Law.

3. Equal Rights for Women: Ensures equal property and inheritance rights.

4. Mandatory Online Registrations: Marriage, divorce, and live-in relationships must be

registered on the government portal ucc.uk.gov.in.

5. Inheritance and Property Rights

6. legitimizing live-in Relationship.

7. To promote gender equality.

 Live-in relationship

a. Defines the live-in relationship explicitly ‘as a relationship between a man and a woman (partners), who cohabit in a shared relationship in the mature of marriage.

b. Makes registration of live-in relationship mandatory, failing which can lead to a jail term of up to three months.

c. Termination of relationship also requires the couple to notify to the

authority, failure of which can be penalized.

d. Provides woman with right to claim maintenance when deserted by their live-in partner.

e. This provision is applicable to all those living in Uttarakhand as well as

residents of Uttarakhand living elsewhere in India.

Landmark Case Law

For the first time, the validity of live-in relationships was upheld in the Supreme Court, Badri Prasad vs. Dy. Director 22 of Consolidation on August 01, 1978. In this case, the bench observed that if a man and a woman lived together for a long time, such a relationship is presumed to be a marriage.

In the landmark judgment, S. Khushboo vs. Kanniammal & Anr. 23 (April 28, 2010), the Supreme Court held that live-in relationships were not illegal as well as there’s no such law that prohibits live-in relationships or pre-marital sex. It also highlighted that living together is a right to life as per Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

 Why Did Uttarakhand Implement the Uniform Civil Code First?

Uttarakhand has made headlines by becoming the first state in India to implement the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), a landmark decision that promises far-reaching social, political, and legal implications. But why did this hill state take such a bold step? 

1. Uttarakhand's Demographic Diversity & Need for Unity

Uttarakhand, with its multireligious population, has long faced the challenges of managing religious diversity in personal matters such as marriage, inheritance, and divorce. 

1. Implementing the UCC is seen as a vital step toward creating legal unity by ensuring that all citizens—regardless of their religion—are treated equally under the law.

2. Key benefit: Reduces legal fragmentation by unifying personal laws for all citizens.

2. Championing Gender Equality Through the UCC

One of the primary drivers for Uttarakhand’s UCC implementation is empowering women. Current personal laws across different communities often favormen, especially in areas like property inheritance and divorce. 

1. The UCC is designed to offer equal rights to women in all communities, ensuring fairness and justice.

2. Key benefit: Women’s empowerment by eliminating gender discrimination in personal laws.

3.Promoting Secularism with a Common Legal Code

The UCC reflects the secular principles of the Indian Constitution, aiming to establish a common legal framework irrespective of religious beliefs.

1 Uttarakhand’s adoption of this law aligns with the goal of minimizing religious influence in personal matters like marriage and inheritance, fostering a more unified, secular society.

2.Key benefit: Reinforces secular values by ensuring religion does not dictate civil law.

3. A Bold Political and Social Reform

Uttarakhand’s government, led by the BJP, has demonstrated a clear political will to implement the UCC, reflecting the broader national agenda for legal reforms. 

1. By doing so, the state not only positions itself as a progressive reformer but also becomes a role model for other states to follow in modernizing legal systems.

2. Key benefit: Shows political leadership in driving national legal reform agendas.

4. Reducing Social Polarization with Unified Laws

Uttarakhand has experienced growing social tensions over issues like interfaith marriages, inheritance disputes, and property rights, all influenced by religious personal laws. 

3. The UCC is a strategic solution to these challenges, promoting social cohesion and ensuring that all citizens are treated equally, regardless of their background.

4. Key benefit: Reduces polarization and enhances social harmony across communities.

 6. Responding to Public Demand for Reform

The UCC is being implemented as part of a broader public demand for a more equitable legal system. 

1. There is a growing call for legal reforms that ensure fairness, especially in matters like inheritance, marriage, and divorce. 

2. Uttarakhand’s decision directly addresses these demands by offering a fairer, unified approach.

3. Key benefit: Meets public demand for fairer, simpler legal frameworks.

 7. Uttarakhand Sets a Precedent for Other States

 By implementing the UCC first, Uttarakhand is setting an important precedent for the rest of India. This bold step not only brings immediate legal reforms but also acts as a test case for the national debate on the Uniform Civil Code. 

1. If successful, Uttarakhand could pave the way for broader national

implementation of the UCC.

2. Key benefit: Acts as a model state for national legal reforms.

Conclusion

In the end, India's Uniform Civil Code reflects how a varied nation weaves together its unique tapestry of cultures and religions, and it's not necessarily just a question of gender fairness. India's approach strikes a compromise between religious freedom and ideas of equality and justice, working to change majority habits while protecting vulnerable individuals inside minority businesses. It may not be entirely accurate to compare India to Western democracies because the country's unique circumstances call for a customized response.

It is still up for debate whether the Uniform Civil Code should be mandatory or should allow people to choose to live according to their own religious laws. In any case, it is critical to start an open discussion about outlining our values and points of contention over this code—a debate that has been mainly lacking since the adoption of the Constitution. Importantly, the freedom to exercise one's religion, guaranteed by Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution, must not be violated by the Uniform Civil Code. Like the Special Marriage Act of 1954, there must be a fresh law free of prejudices and more suited to any religion.

The adoption of the code must ultimately be gradual and accompanied by comprehensive sensitization campaigns, with an emphasis on democratizing institutions and changing current non-public regulations. In addition to promoting gender equality, this strategy will promote peace within India's varied population while upholding the country's unique legal heritage and pursuing advancement.

Bibliography

Books

 M.P. Jain, Indian Constitution Law 1430 (7 th ed 2014)

 Dr. J.N. Pandey, Constitutional Law of India 461 (54 th . Ed. 2024).

Journal

 Taxman (May 2, 2024), https://www.taxmann.com/post/blog/uniform-civil-code-ucc-in-india/

 Journal - S. Nivetha, Colonial Legacy and the Uniform Civil Code of Goa, 7 Indian J. L. & Legal Res. 4554 (2025).- https://periodicodimineralogia.it/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/PDM-2493517.pdf

 Prabhat Mishra, Why Did Uttarakhand Implement the Uniform Civil Code First? Jagran Josh (27 Jan, 2025) https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/why-did-uttarakhand-implement-the-uniform-civil-code-first-1737962530-1

 Manjiri Mulye, Uniform Civil Code (UCC): Pros and Cons in a nutshell, Clear IAS, https://www.clearias.com/uniform-civil-code-ucc/.

 Somashekarappa, 2024 - https://periodicodimineralogia.it/wp-

content/uploads/2024/09/PDM-2493517.pdf

 pooja Arora, Uniform Civil Code in Goa, I pleaders (17Jan,2021)-

https://blog.ipleaders.in/uniform-civil-code-goa-case-study

 Ishita Mishra, Uniform Civil Code in Uttarakhand, The Hindu (27 Jan,2025)-https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thehindu.com/news/national/uttarakhanda

Case Laws

 Mohd. Ahmad Khan v. Shah Bano Begum AIR 1985 SC 945, 954 (1985) 2 SCC 556.

 Shayara Bano V. Union of India AIR 2017 SC 4690.

 Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995), 3 SCC 635.

 Ms. Jordan Diengdeh v. S.S Chopra, (1985) 3 SCC 62 AIR 1985 SC 935.

 Danial Latif v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 3280.

 John Vallamatton V. Union of India AIR 2003 SC 2902.

 Jose Paulo Coutinho v. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira, AIR 2019 SCC SC 1190

 Badri Prasad v. Dy. Director of Consolidation, AIR 1978 SC 1557, (1978) 3 SCC 527.

 Khushboo v. Kanniammal, AIR 2010, 5 SCC 600.