'Equal rights for Ram, Rahim, Ravinder and Robin': CM Mohan Yadav after Madhya Pradesh cabinet approves UCC
The Madhya Pradesh Cabinet approved the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) Bill, 2026, clearing it for introduction in the state legislative assembly during its monsoon session.
The Bill criminalises triple talaq and nikah halala and imposes a blanket prohibition on polygamy across all communities.
It mandates registration of live-in relationships, requiring a "Statement of Live-in Relationship" to be submitted to the Registrar within one month of cohabitation beginning, with non-registration attracting up to three months' imprisonment.
The Bill proposes equal legal and inheritance rights for all children — whether biological, adopted, or born through surrogacy or assisted reproductive technology — regardless of their parents' marital status.
Scheduled Tribes and communities whose customary rights are protected under Part XXI of the Constitution are exempted from the Bill's scope.
If enacted, Madhya Pradesh would become the fourth state to implement a Uniform Civil Code, after Uttarakhand, Gujarat, and Assam.
Uniform Civil Code and Article 44 (DPSP)
The Uniform Civil Code refers to a single set of civil laws — governing marriage, divorce, adoption, succession, and maintenance — applicable to all citizens regardless of religion, replacing the current framework of religion-specific personal laws. Article 44, a Directive Principle of State Policy in Part IV, states that "the State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India." As a DPSP, it is not judicially enforceable but is meant to guide legislation.
Key Details
- Article 44 has existed since the Constitution's commencement in 1950 but remained unimplemented by any state until Uttarakhand's Uniform Civil Code Act, passed by its Assembly in February 2024 and brought into force from 27 January 2025
- Gujarat became the second state to pass a UCC Bill, followed by Assam as the third, both in 2026
- Personal laws for Hindus, Muslims, Christians, and Parsis currently govern marriage, divorce, succession, and adoption separately (e.g., Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Indian Christian Marriage Act 1872, Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act 1936, and uncodified Muslim personal law)
Madhya Pradesh's Cabinet-approved Bill would extend the state-level UCC trend to a fourth and demographically larger state, testing how far Article 44's aspiration can be scaled beyond smaller states.
Triple Talaq, Nikah Halala, and Bigamy Law
In Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017), a five-judge Constitution Bench struck down talaq-e-biddat (instant triple talaq) as unconstitutional by a 3:2 majority, holding it manifestly arbitrary and violative of Article 14; Parliament followed up with the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, criminalising the practice. However, the Court's ruling did not extend to nikah halala or polygamy, leaving those practices without a central legislative or judicial bar — a gap state-level UCC bills like Madhya Pradesh's now seek to close directly. Separately, bigamy for Hindus, Christians, and Parsis is already an offence under Section 82 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in force since 1 July 2024), punishable with up to seven years' imprisonment, rising to ten years if the earlier marriage was concealed.
Key Details
- Shayara Bano v. Union of India, AIR 2017 SC 4609 — struck down instant triple talaq under Article 14; left nikah halala and polygamy unadjudicated
- Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 — criminalises pronouncement of instant triple talaq
- BNS Section 82 — bigamy punishable with up to 7 years' imprisonment (10 years if concealment involved); currently the general/uncodified Muslim personal law is not covered by this bar
- Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995) — held that religious conversion cannot be used as a device to escape bigamy liability under a subsisting marriage
By criminalising both triple talaq and nikah halala and imposing a blanket, community-neutral ban on polygamy, the Bill uses the state legislative route to cover ground the Supreme Court's 2017 ruling and the 2019 central Act left untouched.
Live-in Relationship Registration — Comparison with Uttarakhand
Mandatory registration of live-in relationships was a defining and contested feature of Uttarakhand's 2024 UCC, which requires couples to register within one month of the relationship beginning, with non-compliance treated as an offence. Madhya Pradesh's draft mirrors this one-month registration window but attaches a specific criminal penalty of up to three months' imprisonment for failure to register.
Key Details
- Uttarakhand's Code requires registration within one month of "entering the relationship," permits online or offline filing, and applies only to unmarried, heterosexual couples
- Uttarakhand's law extends maintenance rights to deserted women in registered live-in relationships and confers legitimacy on children born from such relationships
- Madhya Pradesh's draft similarly proposes equal inheritance rights for children irrespective of the parents' marital status, extending this protection to children of live-in couples as well
The mandatory registration and penalty structure signals that Madhya Pradesh's Bill follows the Uttarakhand template closely, rather than adopting a materially different regulatory approach to live-in relationships.
Constitutional Exemptions — Fifth/Sixth Schedule and Article 371 (Part XXI)
State UCC bills typically carve out exemptions for Scheduled Tribes and communities covered by special constitutional protections, reflecting the constitutional recognition that certain groups' customary law is protected independently of Article 44's general aspiration. Part XXI of the Constitution (Articles 369–392) contains "Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions," including Article 371-series provisions for specific states.
Key Details
- Article 371A protects Naga customary law and social practices in Nagaland from Parliamentary legislation unless the state Assembly consents; Article 371G contains a similar protection for Mizo customary law in Mizoram
- The Fifth Schedule governs administration of Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes in most states; the Sixth Schedule governs autonomous district councils in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram
- Madhya Pradesh's Bill exempts Scheduled Tribes and communities whose customary rights fall under Part XXI protections, consistent with the approach taken in Uttarakhand's UCC
These exemptions illustrate a recurring constitutional tension in UCC implementation — a state-level uniform code coexists with express constitutional carve-outs for tribal and specially protected communities, meaning "uniform" in practice still admits significant exceptions.
- Madhya Pradesh would be the fourth state to enact a Uniform Civil Code, after Uttarakhand (in force from 27 January 2025), Gujarat, and Assam (both 2026)
- Live-in relationship registration window: one month from commencement of cohabitation; non-registration penalty proposed at up to three months' imprisonment
- Bigamy under BNS Section 82: up to 7 years' imprisonment (10 years if the earlier marriage was concealed)
- Article 44 (DPSP) has remained unimplemented at the national level since 1950; only state-level UCCs exist so far
- Shayara Bano (2017) and Sarla Mudgal (1995) remain the leading Supreme Court precedents on triple talaq and bigamy-via-conversion respectively
- Exemptions apply to Scheduled Tribes and communities protected under Part XXI special provisions (e.g., Article 371A, 371G)