What is Uniform about UCC?

With due respect to importance being accorded to the Uniform Civil Code Act, 2024 having been formally implemented in Uttarakhand and apparently considered so politically in states with BharatiyaJanata Power (BJP) in power, one is prompted to deliberate upon its “uniformity” and the manner in which hype appears to be raised about it. First, even in Uttarakhand, it is not binding on all Indians as it does not apply to members of Scheduled Tribes.

Besides, one may draw attention to the manner to which certain political and social messages regarding this code have been and are being spread. One of these is its emphasis on minimum marriageable age, with 18 years for women and 21 for men. While asserting this point, the messages draw attention to preventing marriages among younger girls belonging to a minority community. One may draw attention to the reality that marriages taking place of girls at younger than 18 years is hardly decided by their religious community. Rather, it seems to be decided by their educational status, economic background, their rural/urban residence, and several cultural issues, which seem to be common for most who choose to get their daughters married at a young age. It would be great if some attention were paid to specifying the “uniformity” of this point, regarding marriageable age, in messages being spread about this code.

Where polygamy is concerned, perhaps some attention should be paid to it at a “uniform level.” After all, the Uniform Civil Code Act, 2024 is supposed to bear the same importance for all in the country. Now, there are a few points in that having been formally included in Uttarakhand, which seem hardly applicable in other parts of the country.

The preceding question may also be raised about the points laid out about live-in relationships in the Uttarakhand UCC. It mandates registration of these relationships, so that they gain legal recognition. Given that there is no reference to whether a married person can register a live-in relationship with someone else, whether the same would be permitted or not, this seems equivalent to perhaps leaving a loophole for a person to have relationships with two persons, one as married and the other as live-in. This would be equivalent to allowing legal status to both. Neither is there any reference to how many live-in relationships a person can have.

Besides, it is well known that in quite a few cities, live-in relationships have begun being practised quite openly.

In addition, if even a section of society is exempt from UCC, how can it be viewed as Uniform? Besides, as is evident, Uttarakhand has implemented it in keeping with the points that seem most pertinent. But then, if each state chooses to do so, there would probably be as many versions of UCC as there are states. Prospects of other states not giving the same importance to points which Uttarakhand has cannot be side-lined? So what really is Uniform about UCC?

[Contributed by Nilofar Suhrawardy]

Back to Home Page

Frontier
Vol 57, No. 43, Apr 20 - 26, 2025