Personal laws, reform and the uniform civil code

Detail

What personal laws are

• Personal laws are family laws that differ by religion. They cover four areas:
• marriage
• divorce
• inheritance (who gets family property after a death)

• adoption and guardianship

• Criminal law, contract law and tax law are the same for every citizen. Family law is the main area where each religion still has its own rules.

• Uniform Civil Code (UCC): one set of family laws for all citizens, whatever their religion.
• Article 44 is a Directive Principle of State Policy (DPSP). DPSPs are goals the government should work towards, but no court can force the government to act on them.
• Article 44 says: "The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India."
• The detailed treatment of Article 44 is in the DPSP and Fundamental Duties note.

NCERT's dilemma: two ways to see personal laws

• View 1: personal laws as community rights.
• They protect a minority's way of life. Articles 25–30 protect religious freedom and minority cultural rights.

• They shield a minority from inter-religious domination, where a bigger religious group controls a smaller one.

• View 2: personal laws as a source of unfairness.

• They can allow intra-religious domination, where some members of the same religion control others. In family law, men often control women.

• Many personal-law rules treat women unequally in divorce, maintenance and property. This clashes with Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 15 (no discrimination on grounds of sex).

• Why Indian secularism faces this problem:

• Western secularism keeps a strict wall between state and religion, so the state does not touch religious family rules.
• Indian secularism follows principled distance: the state keeps away from religion or steps in, depending on which choice better protects freedom and equality. Family law is the hardest test of this idea.

NCERT's answer: reform, with the state as a facilitator

• Goal: reform personal laws so that both minority rights and gender equality survive. Neither should be given up for the other.
• What reform should NOT be:
• forced by the state from above, or

• forced by a religious group's leaders on its own members.

• What the state should NOT do either: stay completely away and let unfair practices continue.

• The middle path: the state as a facilitator. The state supports liberal and democratic voices within each religion, such as women's groups and reformers. Change then comes from inside the community and does not have to be imposed from outside.
• Class 10 view (women's movement): family laws of all religions discriminate against women, not just one community's laws. So women's groups have asked for family laws to be made fairer for all.

The legal map: which law applies to whom

Community	Main laws	Key point
Hindus (the term in these Acts also covers Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists)	Hindu Marriage Act 1955; Hindu Succession Act 1956; Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act 1956; Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956	Together called the Hindu Code. Passed by Parliament in the 1950s after the Hindu Code Bill debate
Muslims	Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act 1937; Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act 1939	1937 Act: Shariat applies to Muslims' family matters. 1939 Act: lists grounds on which a Muslim woman can get a divorce through a court
Christians	Indian Christian Marriage Act 1872 (divorce under the Indian Divorce Act 1869)	Laws from the colonial period
Parsis	Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act 1936	Separate community law
Any two persons, any religion	Special Marriage Act 1954	The civil option: a non-religious marriage, open to inter-faith couples, through a Marriage Officer
Goa	Portuguese-era civil code (1867)	One family law for all Goans. It was kept in force after Goa joined India in 1961

• Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005:
• Daughters became coparceners. A coparcener is a joint heir who has a share in family property by birth, as sons always had.
• In Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020) the Supreme Court held that a daughter has this right by birth, even if her father died before the 2005 amendment came into force.

Reform through courts and law: maintenance

• Maintenance means money a husband must pay to support a wife or ex-wife who cannot support herself.
• Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) 1973 is a common, religion-neutral rule. Any wife, including a divorced wife, can claim maintenance under it. From 1 July 2024 it is section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023.

The chain of cases:

• Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985)
• A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held that a divorced Muslim woman could claim maintenance under s. 125 CrPC.

• The Court also urged the state to work towards a UCC.

• Political reaction → Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act 1986

• Many people read the Act as limiting a divorced Muslim woman's claim to the iddat period (the waiting period of about three months after divorce).

• Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001)

• A Constitution Bench upheld the 1986 Act but read it in a way that helps women.

• The husband must make a "reasonable and fair provision" for the woman's future within the iddat period. This provision can cover her whole life after divorce.

• Mohd. Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana (2024)

• The judgment was given on 10 July 2024 (2024 INSC 506, Criminal Appeal No. 2842 of 2024) [7].
• The husband argued that the 1986 Act stopped a divorced Muslim woman from using s. 125 CrPC. The Court rejected this argument [7].
• The two judges agreed unanimously that a husband's duty under s. 125 is not affected by any personal law. The s. 125 remedy is always available [7].
• Reason: the 1986 Act cannot dilute s. 125, whose purpose is to save a wife, including a divorced wife, from poverty and destitution [7].
• The Court upheld the Telangana High Court's order of 13 December 2023 [7].

Reform through courts and law: triple talaq

• Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017)

• By a 3:2 majority, the Supreme Court set aside talaq-e-biddat (instant triple talaq). This is a husband saying "talaq" three times at once to end the marriage immediately.

• Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act 2019

• This Act makes instant triple talaq void and a punishable offence. Details are in §7.

The UCC debate: the Law Commission

• 21st Law Commission: consultation paper "Reform of Family Law" (31 August 2018)
• The Ministry of Law and Justice had asked the Commission to examine whether a UCC was feasible [5].
• The paper looked at reform in marriage, divorce, custody, succession and inheritance across all personal laws [5].

• Its conclusion: a UCC is "neither necessary nor desirable at this stage." It said each personal law should be reformed from within to remove discrimination. In short: equality within communities before uniformity across them.

• 22nd Law Commission reopened consultation in 2023

• Public notice issued on 14 June 2023. Responses were due by 28 July 2023 [4].
• It asked for views from the public and recognised religious organisations [6].

The Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code Act 2024

• Basic facts
• Passed by the Uttarakhand Legislative Assembly as Act No. 3 of 2024 [2].
• Presidential assent on 11 March 2024 [2]. Family law is in the Concurrent List, so a state law that differs from central law needs the President's assent to prevail in that state (Article 254(2)).

• In force from 27 January 2025. It is the first state UCC since Independence. Goa's code is older but was inherited from Portuguese rule.

• Who it covers

• The whole state of Uttarakhand, and also residents of Uttarakhand who live outside the state [2][3].
• It does not apply to Scheduled Tribes [2][3].

• It overrides personal laws on marriage and divorce [3].

• Main provisions

• Compulsory registration of marriages made after the Code came into force [2].
• Live-in relationships must be registered. If a partner is below 21, the partner's parents must be informed [2].
• Children of live-in partners are legitimate [2].
• A woman deserted by a live-in partner can claim maintenance [2].
• Polygamy (having more than one spouse at a time) is banned.

• Halala is banned. Under halala, a divorced woman must marry and divorce another man before she can remarry her first husband.

• Other states: some other states have moved towards similar laws. Check the latest position before the exam.

Arguments for and against a UCC

For a UCC	Against a UCC (or against hurrying it)
Gender justice: equal rights for women in marriage, divorce and inheritance (Articles 14, 15)	Community autonomy: each community's right to its own way of life (Articles 25, 26, 29)
National integration: one civil law for all strengthens common citizenship	Fear of majoritarian uniformity: "uniform" may in practice mean the majority's customs imposed on minorities
Ends confusion caused by many overlapping laws	Diversity of customs, including within Hindus, makes one code hard to draft
Completes Article 44, a goal set by the Constitution	2018 Law Commission: reform each law from within first

• "Uniform" vs "common":
• Uniform means one identical law for everyone.
• Common means a shared floor of equal rights that every family law must meet, while some differences remain.

• Many critics accept a "common" code but fear a "uniform" one.

• Tribal customary law is protected:

• Sixth Schedule: autonomous district councils in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram can make laws on marriage, divorce and inheritance for tribal communities.
• Article 371A (Nagaland) and Article 371G (Mizoram): no Act of Parliament on the people's religious or social practices, customary law, or ownership and transfer of land applies unless the state Assembly agrees by resolution.
• This is why even the Uttarakhand Act leaves out Scheduled Tribes.

Prelims Hooks

• Article 44 (in the DPSPs, Part IV, not Fundamental Rights): "The State shall endeavour to secure… a uniform civil code." No court can enforce it.
• Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005 made daughters coparceners. Vineeta Sharma (2020): the right exists by birth, whether or not the father was alive in 2005.
• Shah Bano (1985) → Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act 1986 → Danial Latifi (2001), which upheld the Act but required a "reasonable and fair provision" for the divorced woman.
• Mohd. Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana (10 July 2024): divorced Muslim women can claim maintenance under s. 125 CrPC (now s. 144 BNSS). The 1986 Act does not bar this [7].
• Shayara Bano (2017): instant triple talaq set aside by a 3:2 majority. Followed by the 2019 Act.
• Special Marriage Act 1954 is the civil-marriage option for any two persons. Goa's civil code dates from 1867 (Portuguese).
• Law Commission paper of 31 August 2018 (21st Commission): UCC "neither necessary nor desirable at this stage." 22nd Commission public notice: 14 June 2023 [5][4].
• Uttarakhand UCC Act 2024: Act No. 3 of 2024, President's assent 11 March 2024, in force 27 January 2025. Excludes Scheduled Tribes and covers residents living outside the state [2][3].
• Trap: Articles 371A and 371G protect customary law in Nagaland and Mizoram, not Manipur or Sikkim.

Mains Points

• Principled distance in practice: NCERT's "state as facilitator" model avoids both coercion and indifference. Supporting reformers inside each community (as with the Hindu Code in the 1950s, and Shayara Bano being brought by a Muslim woman petitioner) makes reform last longer and look less like majority imposition.
• Courts as a quiet route to equality: Shah Bano → Danial Latifi → Abdul Samad (2024) used a common, religion-neutral rule (s. 125 CrPC / s. 144 BNSS) to secure gender justice without abolishing personal law. This is a "common floor" approach in place of a "uniform code" [7].
• Uniform vs common, and federalism: the 2018 Law Commission advised reform within each law. The Uttarakhand Act 2024 chose a state-level code but exempted Scheduled Tribes [2][5]. This shows that full uniformity is limited by the Sixth Schedule and Arts. 371A/371G, and that a national debate is now being shaped by state-level laws.
• Live-in registration and privacy: the Uttarakhand Act protects women and children (maintenance, legitimacy) [2]. Critics question whether compulsory registration of live-in relationships, with notice to parents, fits the right to privacy (K.S. Puttaswamy, 2017) and adults' right to choose a partner.