‘UCC A Constitutional Ambition, Nothing To Do With Any Religion Particularly’: CJI

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday observed that the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) has nothing to do with any particular religion and it is a constitutional ambition.

A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant made this observation while seeking Centre's response on a plea challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, on the ground that those are allegedly discriminatory against women.

The bench, also comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, took note of the submissions made by advocate Prashant Bhushan, who appeared in the matter for petitioners Poulomi Pavini Shukla and the Nyaya Naari Foundation. The bench issued a notice to the Union Ministry of Minority Affairs.

During the hearing, Bhushan argued that on the face of it is discriminatory to say that women will get half or even then what their male counterparts will get by way of inheritance. “Now, the question is whether it is an essential religious practice protected, for example, in triple talaq, your lordship held that is not an essential religious practice. This is certainly purely civil matter. It can’t be essential religious practice protected under Article 25 of the Constitution," argued Bhushan.

Bhushan said the inheritance rights of Muslim women is certainly not an essential religious practice. The bench said, “Mr Bhushan, someone will argue it is a question of personal law." Bhushan replied that it may be a question of personal law but not an essential religious practice, and it is not protected under Article 25, and in the absence of that protection, it is certainly subject to Article 14 and ex facie discriminatory.

Bhushan said the question is what will happen if it is struck down, and if the court says that Sharia law will not apply, then one non-discriminatory law which can be applied is the Indian Succession Act, which is completely agnostic towards male and females. He said Hindu succession law is codified by Hindu Succession Act and only the Muslim succession law is not codified and that is the only law which is not codified.

“The rules of succession under Sharia law are so complicated that it is even impossible for lawyers to discern what is the succession practice under Sharia law. I have always told my Muslim friends also do not to oppose the Uniform Civil Code (UCC)," argued Bhushan, adding that they fear that in the name of UCC, the Hindu civil code will be imposed on them.

“It is a constitutional declaration. UCC has nothing to do with any religion, particularly. It is a constitutional ambition," observed the CJI. Bhushan agreed that it is a constitutional ambition for good reason because civil law should be uniform.

Justice Bagchi said the Special Marriage Act (SMA) is one of the steps towards uniformity in matrimony and that you have an option from your personal law and “solemnise a marriage as well as rights of paternity and custody under the SMA."

Bhushan said the 1937 Act violates Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution. After the hearing submissions, the bench sought the Centre's response to the plea. The plea says the current Shariat inheritance rules are "manifestly discriminatory" against women, often granting them only half or less of the share allocated to their male counterparts.

Read More

1. Nashik MNC Case: Plea In SC For Controlling 'Deceitful' Religious Conversion
2. ‘Allow Those Whose Claims Are Decided Before Bengal Polls To Cast Votes’, SC To ECI