Uniform Civil Code (Article 44)

A Uniform Civil Code (UCC) means one common set of family laws for every citizen, whatever their religion. Family laws cover marriage, divorce, maintenance (money support after separation), adoption, guardianship of children and inheritance (who gets a person's property after death). Today, in most of India, these matters are decided by personal laws: separate laws for Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Parsis and others. Article 44 of the Constitution asks the State to try to bring in a UCC for the whole country.

What exactly does Article 44 say?

Article 44 says: "The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India." The word "endeavour" means "try". So it is a goal, not a command.

Article 44 sits in Part IV of the Constitution, which holds the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs). These are guidelines for governments. Under Article 37, no court can force the government to follow a DPSP. But Article 37 also says these principles are "fundamental in the governance of the country". So a UCC is a constitutional goal that the courts cannot order, but that governments are expected to keep in mind.

Why does India have different personal laws?

During British rule, criminal law was made common for everyone (the Indian Penal Code, 1860). But family matters were left to each religion's own rules. The British did not want to interfere with religious customs. Over time these customs were written down as separate laws:

• Hindus (which in law also includes Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists): the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, and the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. Together these four are called the Hindu Code Bills.
• Muslims: the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, and the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939.
• Christians: the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, and the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
• Parsis: the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936.

There is also a non-religious option: the Special Marriage Act, 1954. Any two people, of any religion, can marry under it. Some people see it as a small, optional "uniform" law that already exists.

Why do people want a UCC?

Supporters give these main reasons:

• Equality: Article 14 promises equality before the law. Different rules for different religions can mean that a woman of one faith has fewer rights than a woman of another faith.
• Gender justice: Many personal-law rules on divorce, maintenance and inheritance were unfair to women.
• National integration: One civil law can make citizens feel they belong to one legal system.
• Simplicity: One law is easier to understand and apply than many overlapping laws.

Where did it come from?

In the Constituent Assembly, the UCC was discussed as draft Article 35 on 23 November 1948. Some members wanted personal laws kept out of it, or wanted it applied only with each community's consent. K. M. Munshi and Dr B. R. Ambedkar supported keeping it. Ambedkar assured worried members that a future Parliament could start with a code that applied only to those who chose it.

In the end, the UCC was placed among the Directive Principles, not the Fundamental Rights. This was a compromise: it showed the goal, but left the timing to future governments.

What have the courts said?

The Supreme Court has repeatedly asked the government to move towards a UCC:

• Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985): The Court held that a divorced Muslim woman could claim maintenance under the general criminal law (Section 125 of the old Criminal Procedure Code). It also regretted that Article 44 had remained "a dead letter". Parliament then passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
• Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995): Some Hindu men were converting to Islam only to marry a second time without divorcing their first wife. The Court held that such a second marriage is not valid. The first marriage under Hindu law continues, and the man can be punished for bigamy. The Court again urged a UCC.
• John Vallamattom v. Union of India (2003): The Court struck down Section 118 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, which put limits only on Christians giving property to religious or charitable causes. It said this was discriminatory.
• Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017): A five-judge bench, by a 3:2 majority, declared instant triple talaq (talaq-e-biddat) unconstitutional. Parliament later passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, which made it a crime.
• Jose Paulo Coutinho v. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira (2019): The Court called Goa "a shining example" of an Indian state with a uniform civil code.

Goa: the oldest example

Goa follows the Portuguese Civil Code of 1867, introduced there in 1870 under Portuguese rule. When Goa became part of India in 1961, this code was kept. It applies to all Goans, whatever their religion. For example, a husband and wife share property equally, and registration of marriage is compulsory. It is not perfectly uniform: it keeps a few community-specific rules.

What did the Law Commission say?

The 21st Law Commission released a consultation paper on "Reform of Family Law" in 2018. It said that a UCC is "neither necessary nor desirable at this stage". Instead, it suggested removing the unfair parts of each personal law one by one. Then the 22nd Law Commission issued a public notice on 14 June 2023 asking people for fresh views on the UCC. It received a very large number of responses (reported at over 75 lakh).

How can states make a UCC?

Marriage, divorce, adoption, wills and succession fall under Entry 5 of the Concurrent List (List III of the Seventh Schedule). On Concurrent List subjects, both Parliament and state legislatures can make laws. So a state can pass its own UCC.

But there is a catch. Parliament has already made many laws on these subjects (like the Hindu Marriage Act). If a state law clashes with a central law on a Concurrent List subject, Article 254(1) says the central law wins. The state law can survive in that state only if it is reserved for the President and gets her assent under Article 254(2). This is why the Uttarakhand and Gujarat UCCs needed the President's approval.

The state models: Uttarakhand and Gujarat

• Uttarakhand set up an expert committee under Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai on 27 May 2022. The Assembly passed the Bill in February 2024. It got the President's assent on 11 March 2024. The UCC came into force on 27 January 2025, making Uttarakhand the first state in independent India to implement a UCC. It covers marriage, divorce, succession and live-in relationships. Scheduled Tribes are excluded.
• Gujarat formed a committee under the same judge, Justice Ranjana Desai, in February 2025. Its Assembly passed the Bill on 24 March 2026, and the President's assent came on 17 September 2026. Like Uttarakhand, it makes registration of marriages and live-in relationships compulsory, bans polygamy, requires court-based divorce, gives sons and daughters equal inheritance, and excludes Scheduled Tribes.

Why are Scheduled Tribes left out?

Many tribal communities follow their own customary laws on marriage and property. The Constitution protects these in several places. For example, Article 371A says that no Act of Parliament on Naga customary law applies to Nagaland unless its Assembly agrees, and Article 371G gives similar protection to Mizo customary law in Mizoram. The Sixth Schedule lets autonomous district councils in some north-eastern areas make laws on marriage, divorce and inheritance. Leaving tribes out avoids clashing with these protections.

Commonly confused concepts

• UCC vs uniform criminal law: India already has one criminal law for all (now the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023). The UCC debate is only about civil family matters.
• Article 44 (DPSP) vs Article 25 (Fundamental Right): Article 25 gives freedom of religion. But Article 25(2)(a) and (b) allow the State to regulate secular activities linked to religion and to make laws for social welfare and reform. This is the main legal argument that a UCC does not violate religious freedom.
• UCC vs Special Marriage Act: The Special Marriage Act is optional. A UCC applies to everyone, whether they choose it or not.
• State UCC vs national UCC: Uttarakhand and Gujarat UCCs apply only inside those states. A national UCC would need an Act of Parliament.
• Uttarakhand (first to implement, 2025) vs Goa (oldest uniform code, from Portuguese times) vs Gujarat (second state to enact, 2026).

Issues, criticism and the way forward

• Diversity and religious freedom: Critics argue that one code could weaken the customs of minorities and tribal groups. Supporters reply that Article 25(2) allows social reform, and that the law protects the right to practise faith while changing only civil rules.
• Whose rules become "uniform"? Some worry the common code may borrow mostly from one community's law. Supporters say the new codes pick the most gender-just rule from each tradition.
• Privacy and live-in registration: Compulsory registration of live-in relationships, with information sent to the police and to parents of under-21 partners, has been criticised as an intrusion into private life. The Supreme Court has recognised privacy as a fundamental right in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017). Supporters say registration protects women and children born in such relationships.
• Exempting tribes: If some groups are left out, critics ask whether the code is truly "uniform".
• Patchwork of state laws: Different state UCCs could create different rules in different states, which is the opposite of uniformity across the country.
• Way forward suggested: The 2018 Law Commission suggested a step-by-step approach: remove discrimination within each personal law, make the Special Marriage Act easier to use, and build consensus through wide consultation. Many experts suggest that any UCC should be drafted through broad public discussion so that it is seen as fair by all communities.

Concepts to Know

• Personal law: Rules on family matters (marriage, divorce, inheritance) that apply to a person because of their religion.
• Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs): Guidelines in Part IV of the Constitution (Articles 36 to 51) that governments should follow while making laws. Courts cannot enforce them.
• Concurrent List: One of three lists in the Seventh Schedule. It names subjects on which both Parliament and state legislatures can make laws.
• Polygamy and bigamy: Polygamy means having more than one spouse at the same time. Bigamy is the crime of marrying again while the first marriage is still legally alive.
• Succession: The rules that decide who gets a person's property after their death.
• Live-in relationship: A man and a woman living together as a couple in one home without being formally married.
• Coparcener: A person who gets a share in Hindu joint family property by birth. Since the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, daughters are coparceners just like sons.