Supreme Court: UCC is Constitutional Ambition, Unlinked to Religion
The Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, declared that the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a constitutional ambition with no inherent link to any specific religion. This statement was made while issuing a notice on a plea challenging the application of Shariat law in inheritance and testamentary succession matters. The bench, including Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, heard arguments from Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who represented petitioners including the Nyaya Naari Foundation. Bhushan argued that civil laws should be uniform across all religions and that discriminatory practices, such as unequal inheritance rights for women, are not essential religious practices protected under Article 25 of the Constitution. He highlighted that current laws deprive individuals of control over self-acquired property. Justice Bagchi noted existing legislative steps toward uniformity, such as the Special Marriage Act, but questioned judicial intervention due to fundamental religious freedoms. The court tagged this petition with others raising similar issues, emphasizing that inherently discriminatory practices cannot be shielded by religious claims if they violate equity and public order.
Wire timeline
Supreme Court: UCC is Constitutional Ambition, Unlinked to Religion
The Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, declared that the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a constitutional ambition with no inherent link to any specific religion. This statement was made while issuing a notice on a plea challenging the application of Shariat law in inheritance and testamentary succession matters. The bench, including Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, heard arguments from Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who represented petitioners including the Nyaya Naari Foundation. Bhushan argued that civil laws should be uniform across all religions and that discriminatory practices, such as unequal inheritance rights for women, are not essential religious practices protected under Article 25 of the Constitution. He highlighted that current laws deprive individuals of control over self-acquired property. Justice Bagchi noted existing legislative steps toward uniformity, such as the Special Marriage Act, but questioned judicial intervention due to fundamental religious freedoms. The court tagged this petition with others raising similar issues, emphasizing that inherently discriminatory practices cannot be shielded by religious claims if they violate equity and public order.
The Indian Express