New Delhi: With slogans of ‘Jai Shri Ram’, ‘Vande Mataram’ and ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ reverberating in the Bharatiya Janata Party-dominated assembly, the Uttarakhand government on February 6 tabled a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) Bill in the state assembly. A part of this Bill mandates compulsory registration of live-in relationships and punishment of three to six months in jail for failing to do so.
If passed, Uttarakhand would become the first state in the country to implement a UCC, which has been a long-standing election agenda of the saffron party. The Opposition Congress accused the ruling BJP led by chief minister Pushkar Singh Dhami of introducing the Bill in the assembly without giving its MLAs time to study or review the provisions, and said it wanted to pass the law without debate.
The Bill bans bigamy or polygamy; regulates live-in relationships including setting up rules for their compulsory registration and punitive measures for failing to do so; standardises the process of divorce for both men and women; lays out procedure for compulsory registration of marriages and prohibits marriages and live-in relationships between those who fall within degrees of prohibited relationships such as close family members and relatives; and eliminates the distinction between legitimate and illegitimate children and treats adopted child on an equal footing as a biological child and provides equal inheritance rights for men and women. The Bill will not be applicable to members of the Scheduled Tribes, who are less than 3% of the state’s population.
Dhami described it a “historic moment” and said that his government had introduced the Bill in the assembly taking along all sections of the society. “That historic moment is near for Devbhoomi when Uttarakhand will become a strong pillar of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s vision of ‘Ek Bharat, Shresth Bharat’,” said Dhami.
Mandatory registration of live-in relationships
A key highlight of The Uniform Civil Code of Uttarakhand, 2024 is that it mandates the obligatory registration of live-in relationships. Even those residents of Uttarakhand who are in a live-in relationship outside the state must submit a statement to the registrar of the state. Those in a live-in relationship, or intending to get into one, will need to submit a statement of live-in relationship to the registrar who will carry out an inquiry which might include the persons or couple to provide additional information or evidence or be summoned for verification. After conducting the inquiry, the registrar shall within 30 days of the receipt of the statement of live-in either register the relationship and issue a certificate or refuse to register the statement. The partners will be informed about the denial of registration in writing. The Bill mandates that the registrar has to forward a statement of the live-in relationship to the in-charge of the local police station for record and, in case either of the partners is less than 21 years of age, also inform the parents or guardians of such partners.
Also read: The Things We Need to Do Before We Speak of the Uniform Civil Code
The Bill says that whoever stays in a live-in relationship for more than one month without submitting the statement of such a relationship shall be punished on conviction by a judicial magistrate with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine not exceeding Rs 10,000 or both. If the individuals submit false information or withholds information during registration, they would also face a jail term of three months and an ever bigger fine of Rs 25,000. If any of the partners fails to submit the statement of live-in relationship on being required by a notice, they shall face a jail term of six months and Rs 25,000 fine.
The UCC Bill also declares that a child of a live-in relationship shall also be a legitimate child of the couple and mandates that if a woman gets deserted by her live-in partner, she shall be entitled to claim maintenance from her partner.
Rules on marriage and divorce
A five-member committee of experts under retired judge Ranjana Prakash Desai, formed by the state government as part of its election promise, had last week submitted its report on the UCC to Dhami. The committee was to examine the relevant laws regulating personal civil matters of residents of the state and to prepare a draft law or suggest changes in existing laws on marriage, divorce, property rights, succession, inheritance, adoption, maintenance, custody and guardianship. The committee was also tasked with preparing a report on implementing a UCC in the state.
The UCC Bill draft was introduced in the state assembly on Tuesday, two days after the cabinet gave a nod to it.
The Bill makes compulsory the registration of marriage solemnised and contracted after the commencement of the UCC. It prohibits polygamy by stipulating that a person entering into a marriage should not have a living spouse and should be at least 18 (women) and 21 (men) years of age. Interestingly, it says that marriages may be solemnised or contracted between a man and a woman in accordance with the religious beliefs, practices, customary rites and ceremonies including but not limited to “Saptapadi”, “Ashirvad”, “Nikah”, “Holy Union”, “Anand Karaj” under The Anand Marriage Act 1909 as well as under, but not limited to, The Special Marriage Act, 1954 and Arya Marriage Validation Act, 1937.
The Bill also lays out a common procedure for divorce. Marriage, either before or after UCC, can be dissolved by either partner (through petition) on several grounds including cruelty, adultery, desertion for two years and conversion of religion. A wife may also present a petition to the court for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the additional ground that the husband has, since the solemnisation or contracting of the marriage, been guilty of rape or any other kind of unnatural sexual offence or that the husband had more than one wife from marriages solemnised before the commencement of the UCC.
Opposition to the Bill
Premchand Aggarwal, cabinet minister, while introducing the UCC, said a policy of “appeasement” had prevented previous governments from bringing in such a law. “The UCC gives uniform rights to women of all castes and religions,” said Aggarwal in the assembly while seated next to Dhami.
Aggarwal also tried to counter charges by the Opposition about the intent of the BJP behind a UCC, saying that even Muslim countries such as Egypt, Turkey, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Sudan, Pakistan and Indonesia had a uniform civil code.
Also read: The Social and Economic Dangers to the ‘Mother of Democracy’ if a Uniform Civil Code Is Implemented
The Congress said its MLAs were not given any time to prepare for a discussion on the Bill and were not kept in the loop on the content of the expert committee report. Congress MLA and Leader of Opposition Yashpal Arya said before introducing the Bill, the government should have presented the expert committee report for discussion. Arya accused the government of depriving Opposition MLAs of their right to ask questions after the Question Hour was waived off for this session. Arya suggested that the Bill be sent to a select committee to examine it.
“They are suppressing the voice of the MLAs on the strength of their numbers. We didn’t even get time to review the report,” said Arya, who further accused the ruling party of undermining the rules of the assembly and setting a “new precedent” by ignoring constitutional traditions.
The Congress is yet to respond to the specific provisions of the UCC Bill. Arya, however, said he was not against the UCC. Former chief minister Harish Rawat, talking to a news agency, asked if the Union government would allow others states too to bring in similar laws, even as it has promised to bring in a UCC at the national level. “If a state government brings in a law for the ruling class in the name of the UCC to intervene in the personal tradition of another community for vote bank politics, won’t there be disharmony in the state?” Rawat asked. He took the example of the ethnic conflict in Manipur
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind president Maulana Arshad Madani said he could not accept any law that was against the Shariah and said that the UCC was in conflict with the fundamental rights given to citizens. Commenting on the exclusion of STs from the UCC, under Sub-Section 342 of Chapter 25 of Article 366 of the Constitution of India, Madani asked that if tribals can be exempted from the law then “why religious freedom cannot be given to us under Sections 24 and 26 of the Constitution, recognising the fundamental rights of citizens.”
The legal team of the JUH will review the legal aspects of the Bill and take a decision on legal action, said Madani. “Religious freedom is guaranteed; thus, the Uniform Civil Code negates fundamental rights. If it is a uniform civil code then why this distinction between citizens?” he asked.