‘UCC Is The Answer’: Supreme Court Says It’s ‘Most Effective Answer’ To Discriminatory Laws

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday reiterated its support for the enactment of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC), observing that a common civil law framework would help resolve complexities arising from multiple personal laws governing marriage, divorce and succession across communities.

A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and R Mahadevan made the remarks while hearing a petition challenging provisions of Muslim personal law that allegedly discriminate against women.

During the hearing, the Bench indicated that sweeping judicial intervention in personal laws could create unintended consequences and that the issue is best handled by Parliament.

“The answer, as correctly said, is the Uniform Civil Code,” CJI Kant said, supporting the idea of a uniform legal framework for civil matters.

Top Court Stresses Legislative Route

Justice Bagchi emphasised that the judiciary cannot simply invalidate personal laws without ensuring that a comprehensive alternative framework exists.

“To declare personal laws void and create a vacuum… it is best to defer it to legislative wisdom so that the legislature brings about a law on uniform civil code. This court has already recommended uniform civil code,” he said.

He also highlighted the practical difficulties in judicially invalidating certain practices rooted in personal laws.

“See, for a Muslim man, he can divorce unilaterally, by any procedure you follow. Can we declare all bigamous relations founded on personal law as invalid? No. So we have to defer to legislative power to bring fundamental duties, in effect,” Justice Bagchi said.

The observations came as the court considered whether certain aspects of Muslim personal law violate the rights of women.

The petition before the court challenges provisions of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, arguing that it discriminates against Muslim women in matters such as inheritance.

The Bench questioned the implications of striking down the law without a replacement framework.

“You are challenging the 1937 Act. Then what will apply? What about the vacuum?” the CJI asked.

Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioners, argued that Sharia-based succession rules allow women only half the share granted to men.

He suggested that if the 1937 Act were declared unconstitutional, the Indian Succession Act, 1925, which provides equal inheritance rights to men and women, could apply instead.

Bhushan also argued that inheritance rights are civil rights and not protected religious practices under Article 25 of the Constitution.

However, Justice Bagchi questioned whether personal law might still continue to operate under Article 372 of the Constitution, which preserves existing laws until altered by legislation.

‘Unintended Impact On Muslim Women’

The Bench also cautioned against reforms that may inadvertently reduce the rights currently available to Muslim women.

“In our overanxiety of reforms, we may end up depriving them or getting less than what they are already getting,” the CJI said.

“If it goes away (the 1937 Act), then what? That is the question,” CJI Kant said.

The court suggested that the petitioners may consider amending their plea, signalling that a broader legislative solution may be necessary.

What Is The Uniform Civil Code?

The Uniform Civil Code refers to a proposed common set of civil laws governing personal matters such as marriage, divorce, adoption, maintenance and inheritance for all citizens, regardless of religion.

Currently, these matters are governed by separate personal laws based on religious traditions, including Hindu personal law (covering Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs), Muslim personal law, Christian personal law and Parsi personal law.

The concept of a Uniform Civil Code is mentioned in Article 44 of the Constitution, which directs the State to endeavour to secure a uniform civil code for citizens across the country. However, as a Directive Principle of State Policy, it is not enforceable by courts.

Long-Standing Constitutional Debate

The UCC has been debated in India for decades and has frequently surfaced in landmark judgments of the Supreme Court. In several cases, including the Shah Bano ruling in 1985, the court had urged the government to consider implementing a uniform civil code to promote equality and national integration.

Supporters argue that a UCC would ensure gender justice and equal rights for women across communities. Critics, however, say it could undermine religious freedom and minority rights if not carefully designed.

The Bench indicated that any sweeping reform of personal laws, including addressing issues like inheritance rights and bigamy, would require legislative action rather than judicial intervention.

ALSO READ: ‘Book Withdrawn’: Days After SC Rap, NCERT Apologises Over Chapter On Corruption In Judiciary