Supreme Court Affirms Uniform Civil Code as Constitutional Aspiration

In New Delhi, the Chief Justice of India remarked that one could argue this is a matter of personal law. In response, advocate Prashant Bhushan stated that personal law does not receive protection under Article 25 of the Constitution. If it is discriminatory, it should be annulled.

During a hearing on Thursday, the Supreme Court declared that the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a constitutional aspiration and is unrelated to religion. This statement was made while addressing a petition challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, which allegedly discriminates against women.

The bench, comprising Chief Justice Suryakant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi, issued a notice to the Ministry of Minority Affairs, seeking a response. The petition argues that the current inheritance rules under Shariat are explicitly discriminatory towards women and should be revoked. The Chief Justice emphasized that the UCC is a constitutional aspiration and is not tied to any religion.

While responding to concerns raised by the court in previous hearings, Bhushan suggested that if the court annuls the provisions of Shariat law, the Indian Succession Act could be applied. The Chief Justice acknowledged that one could argue this is a matter of personal law, to which Bhushan reiterated that personal law does not have constitutional protection under Article 25 and should be annulled if discriminatory.

He further explained that the Muslim inheritance law is not codified, and its complexities often confuse even lawyers. He frequently advises his Muslim friends not to oppose the UCC. Justice Bagchi agreed with the Chief Justice's remarks, stating that the Special Marriage Act is a step towards uniformity, and questioned whether this is a matter for court intervention or should be left to the legislature. The Supreme Court is considering a petition filed by Palomi Pawini Shukla and the Justice Nari Foundation.

Advocate Bhushan responded that the court can annul discriminatory practices. He argued that stating women receive half or less than their male counterparts is discriminatory and is a civil matter, not a mandatory religious practice under Article 25.

During the proceedings, Bhushan also pointed out that in matters of inheritance through wills, a Muslim cannot bequeath more than one-third of their property. Thus, Muslims cannot will their earned property according to their wishes.

The court suggested that women who suffer discrimination under Shariat law should approach the court. Bhushan noted that the petitioning organization is represented by a Muslim woman, and her lawyer is also Muslim. He mentioned that after the last hearing, several Muslims issued statements in support of the petition, which have been submitted as a list. The Chief Justice advised Bhushan to find individuals who are genuinely affected to prevent future issues.

During the hearing, Bhushan stated that the current inheritance rules under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, are clearly discriminatory against women. He argued that these rules often allocate women half or less than their male counterparts. Bhushan asserted that this Act violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to equality.