Madhya Pradesh Cabinet approves UCC draft bill for presentation in State Assembly
The Madhya Pradesh Cabinet approved a draft Uniform Civil Code (UCC) bill for introduction in the state legislative assembly during its monsoon session.
The draft was prepared on the recommendations of a state-appointed committee (reportedly headed by a retired Supreme Court judge) after a public consultation process, and was vetted by the state Law Department before Cabinet clearance.
Key provisions include a blanket prohibition on polygamy and multiple marriages for all communities, and a declaration that nikah halala (the practice requiring a divorced Muslim woman to marry another man and be divorced again before remarrying her former husband) and iddat-linked provisions are void and punishable.
The draft also proposes mandatory registration of marriages and live-in relationships, and treats un-registered or oral divorce as invalid.
If enacted, Madhya Pradesh would become the second Indian state to implement a UCC, after Uttarakhand's code took effect in 2024.
Uniform Civil Code and Article 44
The Uniform Civil Code refers to a single set of civil laws — governing marriage, divorce, adoption, inheritance and maintenance — applicable to all citizens regardless of religion, replacing the current system of religion-specific personal laws. Article 44, a Directive Principle of State Policy in Part IV of the Constitution, states that "the State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India." Being a DPSP, it is not enforceable in court but is meant to guide legislation. Uttarakhand became the first state to enact a UCC when its Assembly passed the Uniform Civil Code of Uttarakhand Act on 7 February 2024, following recommendations of a five-member committee headed by retired Supreme Court judge Ranjana Prakash Desai; that law explicitly exempts Scheduled Tribes.
Key Details
- Article 44 lies in Part IV (Directive Principles), not enforceable directly under Article 32/226 but usable to interpret statutes.
- Uttarakhand UCC Act, 2024 — first UCC of an Indian state; exempts Scheduled Tribe members (in line with Article 366(25) protections and Fifth/Sixth Schedule sensitivities).
- 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 draft bill, modelled on a similar consultative process, would extend the UCC experiment to a second, much larger state, testing whether Article 44's aspiration can be operationalised at scale.
Bigamy and Polygamy Law
Under codified Hindu, Christian and Parsi personal law, marriage is monogamous — the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Section 5(i)) makes a second marriage during the subsistence of the first void, and Section 17 attracts the criminal offence of bigamy under Section 494 of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code — now Section 82 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in force since 1 July 2024), which punishes bigamy with up to seven years' imprisonment, rising to ten years if the earlier marriage was concealed. Muslim personal law, being uncodified, permits polygamy (up to four wives) for Muslim men, creating the disparity that UCC proposals target. In Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995), the Supreme Court held that a Hindu husband converting to Islam solely to contract a second marriage without dissolving the first commits bigamy under Section 494 IPC, since conversion does not dissolve a subsisting marriage.
Key Details
- BNS Section 82(1): bigamy, up to 7 years' imprisonment and fine; Section 82(2): concealment of an earlier marriage, up to 10 years.
- Muslim personal law (uncodified, based on Shariat) permits polygamy; no statutory prohibition currently exists for Muslim men, unlike Hindus/Christians/Parsis.
- Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995) — barred using religious conversion as a device to escape bigamy liability.
The draft MP bill would remove the personal-law carve-out by imposing a uniform, community-blind prohibition on multiple marriages, directly addressing the legal gap the Sarla Mudgal case highlighted.
Triple Talaq, Nikah Halala and Judicial Limits
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 subsequently enacted the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, criminalising the pronouncement of instant triple talaq. However, the Shayara Bano bench explicitly confined its ruling to triple talaq — the petitioners' parallel challenges to nikah halala and polygamy were left open and remain undecided by the Supreme Court.
Key Details
- Shayara Bano v. Union of India, AIR 2017 SC 4609 — 3:2 verdict, struck down talaq-e-biddat under Article 14; nikah halala and polygamy challenges were left unadjudicated.
- Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 — criminalises instant triple talaq (up to 3 years' imprisonment).
- No central legislation or Supreme Court ruling currently outlaws nikah halala or Muslim male polygamy nationally.
Because the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on nikah halala or polygamy, a state UCC law banning both — as Madhya Pradesh's draft proposes — would be a legislative (not judicial) route to closing that gap, similar to Uttarakhand's 2024 approach.
- Madhya Pradesh would be the second state after Uttarakhand (UCC in force since February 2024) to enact a Uniform Civil Code.
- Bigamy under BNS Section 82: up to 7 years' imprisonment (10 years if the first marriage was concealed).
- Article 44 (DPSP) has existed since the Constitution's commencement in 1950 but remained unimplemented by any state until Uttarakhand's 2024 Act.
- Shayara Bano (2017) and Sarla Mudgal (1995) remain the two leading Supreme Court precedents on triple talaq and bigamy-via-conversion respectively.