18, Feb 2025 | CJP Legal Team

The Uttarakhand High Court has been at the centre of debates in recent weeks regarding the state’s proposed Uniform Civil Code (UCC) adoption. The extent, applicability, and potential impact of the UCC are the subject of numerous petitions that have been filed, posing important legal and constitutional issues. The petitioners have expressed concerns about religious freedom, constitutional rights, and whether the proposed UCC is consistent with the egalitarian tenets of the Indian Constitution. Since Uttarakhand was the first state to take significant action to implement UCC, these petitions are a reflection of the ongoing national discussion on the subject.

Context

The Uttarakhand High Court has issued a 6–week notice to the State government and the Centre to file their responses to the petitions challenging the provisions of the Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code (UCC). Further, in a move to provide temporary relief, the Uttarakhand High Court has asked the affected individuals to approach the court in cases of penal actions, as reported by LiveLaw.

On January 27, 2025, Uttarakhand became the first Indian state to implement a Uniform Civil Code (UCC). However, the law has come under the scrutiny of the Uttarakhand High Court as a result of various writ petitions filed challenging multiple provisions of the UCC. The law makes it mandatory for individuals in live–in relationships to register their relationship with the registrar within whose jurisdiction they reside. Further, the law deliberately targets the minority communities, such as Muslims, and prescribes procedures to be followed in religious matters which is completely contrary to the holy Quran.

For a more comprehensive understanding of the provisions challenged in the impugned UCC, the article published by CJP may be referred to.

Challenges to provisions governing live–in relationships

The mandatory registration of live–in relationships and the penal provisions for non–compliance of the same have been challenged before the High Court. The petitioners have contended that these provisions are against the Fundamental Right to privacy protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. While addressing these contentions, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta appearing for the Government mentioned that “Experience has shown that having lived in live–in relationships without any commitment – which results from marriage only – generally, the man deserts the woman, leaving her destitute and leaving the children born out of such relationships illegitimate.” He further argued that the law aims to regulate live–in relationships, not prohibit the same while stating that “On such a registration, the child born out of such a live–in relationship is considered under the UCC to be a legitimate child, and the deserted woman is given a right to approach the competent court seeking maintenance for herself and her child,” as reported by the Times of India. 

While hearing the batch of petitions, Chief Justice of the Uttarakhand High Court G Narendar questioned as to what the problem is with regulating live–in relationships while orally remarking that “There is also a fallout of this. What happens if this relationship breaks up? What if there is a child out of this relationship? In respect of marriage, there is a presumption regarding paternity but in a live-in relationship, where is that presumption? In the garb of invasion of your privacy, can the self-respect of another person be sacrificed, that too when he is your child and there is no proof of marriage… or paternity,” as reported by the Indian Express.

This debate underscores the necessity of striking a balance between the fundamental right to privacy and protecting the rights of children born out of live–in relationships and providing recognition to them.

Targeting minorities

The law has come under heavy criticism for particularly targeting religious minority communities, such as Muslims. The petitioners have contended that the UCC significantly impacts the Muslim community as it prescribes procedures to be followed which are completely against the principles laid down in the Quran. The petitioners argued that “We have pleaded before the court that the law prescribed in the Quran and its verses is an essential religious practice for every Muslim. UCC prescribes the procedure for religious matters which is absolutely contrary to the verses of the Quran. We have pleaded that to remain a Muslim, a person has to follow the Quran and its Verses.” The petitioners have further stated that “following the verses of the Quran is a mandatory practice for a Muslim and by making a civil law, the state government cannot direct a Muslim person to do anything which is contrary to the verses of Quran,” as reported by the Hindustan Times.

The petitioners cited that by banning the mandatory practice of Iddat that is followed by a divorced Muslim woman, the UCC violates the religious practice of Muslims. The petitioners have further contended that these provisions of the impugned law violate Article 25 of the Constitution of India which protects the freedom of practice and profession of religion. It has also been argued by the petitioners that the UCC is violative of the Preamble of the Indian Constitution as the liberty of expression, belief, faith and worship have been guaranteed under the Preamble.

It should be noted here that while the basis for the Uttarakhand UCC is Article 44 (Uniform civil code for the citizens), which is only a directive principle and not binding and non–justiciable in nature, Articles 25 (Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion), 26 (Freedom to manage religious affairs) and 29 (Protection of interests of minorities) which guarantee freedom of religion have been blatantly ignored. The petitioners have contended that the impugned law strikes at the fundamental principle of Secularism that has been provided in the Constitution of India

The petition also stresses that the impugned law is not Uniform as it excludes the Scheduled Tribes from its purview. The petitioners have argued that the UCC creates “an arbitrary and artificial discrimination, impermissible in law, amongst citizens by not applying it to the Scheduled Tribes” and that such UCC “is not a Uniform Civil Code as directed under Article 44 of the Constitution of India, hence, deserves to be declared void.”

Restrictions on marriage

The list of “prohibited relationships” provided in the UCC has also been challenged by the Petitioners on the grounds that not only do the impugned provisions hinder the Muslims’ right to marry but also declares such marriage void and criminalizes the same. The petitioners have argued that the impugned legislation is “discriminatory in nature since it takes away the customs and usage of the Muslim community by providing for restrictions to marry in ‘degrees of prohibited relationship’ as defined in the UCC.” The petitioners further contended that such restrictions do not exist in the Muslim community and that marriage among relatives is permitted as per the Muslim law.

Conclusion

In conclusion, significant constitutional debates have been sparked by the Uttarakhand High Court’s assessment of the state’s proposed Uniform Civil Code (UCC). Privacy, religious freedom, and equal protection under the law are among the issues raised by the forced registration of live-in relationships, the purported targeting of religious minorities, and limitations on marital customs. The problem is further complicated by the Scheduled Tribes’ exclusion and the possibility of the UCC’s extraterritorial application. The High Court’s decision will be a turning point in determining how to strike a balance between individual laws, cultural autonomy, and the movement for a uniform civil framework, since Uttarakhand’s transition to a UCC is unprecedented in India.

(The legal research team of CJP consists of lawyers and interns; this legal resource has been worked on by Yukta Adha)

Related:

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) of Uttarakhand: Advancement in gender justice or violating individual liberties?

Destroying the basic standards of legislation- the Uttarakhand Model of UCC

Uttarakhand’s UCC seen through a Muslim women’s political perspective