JD(U) won't oppose UCC if provisions are okay: Bihar Deputy Chief Minister
Discussion continued in Bihar over the provisions of a proposed Uniform Civil Code (UCC) Bill, with a state ruling coalition partner stating it would examine the bill's specific provisions before finalising its position.
The party's leadership clarified it would not oppose the legislation "without reason," and would take a final decision only after consultation among coalition partners.
The development comes amid public discussion of a proposed timeline for wider UCC implementation across additional states over the coming years. [Unverified — no official notification or bill text was cited]
Uttarakhand remains, to date, the only state to have enacted and brought a Uniform Civil Code into force, making it the sole operational precedent for any broader rollout.
Article 44 — Uniform Civil Code as a Directive Principle
Article 44, in Part IV of the Constitution, states: "The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India." Like other Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs), it is non-justiciable (not enforceable in court) but is meant to guide state policy-making under Article 37.
Any state-level UCC bill is, constitutionally, a state legislature's attempt to give effect to the Article 44 directive within its own territory — since personal law subjects fall in the Concurrent List (List III), states can legislate on them subject to central law and Presidential assent where required.
Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code Act, 2024 — The Only Operational Precedent
Uttarakhand became the first state to enact and implement a UCC. The bill was passed by the state assembly on February 7, 2024, received presidential assent by March 13, 2024, and the Act was brought into force on January 27, 2025. A further Uniform Civil Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2026 introduced procedural and administrative changes.
Uttarakhand is the benchmark any other state's UCC bill will be measured against — both on scope (does it exempt STs, as Uttarakhand did) and on legislative process (state assembly passage, Presidential assent, notified commencement date).
Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995) — The Judicial Push for a UCC
In Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995 AIR 1531), the Supreme Court held that a Hindu husband who converts to Islam cannot validly remarry without first legally dissolving his first marriage; such a second marriage remains bigamous and punishable under Section 494 IPC (now reflected in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita). The Court used the case to reiterate the Article 44 "unequivocal mandate" for a uniform civil code.
Key Details
- Decided May 10-11, 1995, by the Supreme Court.
- Held that religious conversion does not dissolve a subsisting marriage under the personal law it was solemnised under.
- Frequently cited alongside the 21st Law Commission's 2018 Consultation Paper, which concluded a UCC is "neither necessary nor desirable at this stage," recommending instead that discriminatory provisions within existing personal laws be reformed individually.
The case anchors the judicial strand of the UCC debate (courts repeatedly flagging personal-law conflicts) even as the executive/legislative strand — via state-level bills like Uttarakhand's and the one now under discussion — has moved independently and more recently than the Law Commission's 2018 recommendation.
- Article 44: Part IV, non-justiciable Directive Principle of State Policy
- Uttarakhand UCC Bill passed: February 7, 2024; presidential assent: March 13, 2024; in force: January 27, 2025
- Uttarakhand UCC exempts: Scheduled Tribes (Section 2 of the Act)
- Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India: 1995 AIR 1531, decided May 1995
- 21st Law Commission Consultation Paper (August 31, 2018): UCC "neither necessary nor desirable at this stage"
- Personal law subjects fall under the Concurrent List (List III), Seventh Schedule