Supreme Court Affirms Uniform Civil Code as Constitutional Aspiration
Supreme Court's Stance on Uniform Civil Code
In New Delhi, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) 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 emphasized that the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a constitutional aspiration, 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 Surya Kant 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 reiterated that the UCC is a constitutional goal and is not tied to any religion.
While responding to concerns raised during previous hearings, Bhushan suggested that if the court were to annul the provisions of Shariat law, the Indian Succession Act could then be applied. The CJI acknowledged that one could argue this is a personal law issue, to which Bhushan countered that personal law does not have constitutional protection under Article 25. If it is discriminatory, it should be annulled, allowing the Indian Succession Act to take effect.
It was noted that Muslim inheritance law is not codified, and its complexities often confuse even legal professionals. Bhushan mentioned that he frequently advises his Muslim friends not to oppose the UCC. Justice Bagchi concurred with the Chief Justice's remarks, stating that the Special Marriage Act is a step towards uniformity, and questioned whether this should be a matter for the court or left to the legislature. The Supreme Court is considering a petition filed by Paulomi Pawini Shukla and the Justice Nari Foundation.
Bhushan responded that the court can annul discriminatory practices, asserting that stating women receive half or less than their male counterparts is discriminatory. He emphasized that this is a civil matter, not a mandatory religious practice under Article 25.
During the proceedings, Bhushan also pointed out that regarding 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 under Shariat law should approach the court. Bhushan noted that the petitioner is represented by a Muslim woman, and her advocate is also Muslim. He mentioned that following the last hearing, several Muslims issued statements in support of the petition, which were presented as a list. The CJI urged Bhushan to find individuals who are genuinely affected to prevent future issues.
Bhushan highlighted that the current inheritance rules under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, are clearly discriminatory against women, often granting them half or less than their male counterparts. He argued that this Act violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to equality.