Uttarakhand has become the first state in India to implement the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), ensuring equal laws for all citizens. However, the move has drawn sharp criticism from Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, which plans to challenge the decision in court, citing it as discriminatory and an attack on religious freedom. The organization argues that the law violates constitutional guarantees of religious rights and vows to oppose it through all democratic means.
The Uttarakhand government is set to implement the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) starting today. This new law will replace personal laws based on religion with a common set of rules for all citizens. It will govern matters like marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption, aiming to ensure equality and justice. While some see it as a step toward fairness, others believe it could affect cultural and religious practices.
The Uttarakhand government introduced new rules for marriage registration under the Uniform Civil Code. These rules aim to provide clarity in legal provisions concerning marital conditions and individual rights. The move ensures a standardized process for marriage registration across the state. This step is part of efforts to strengthen the legal framework for marriages under the Uniform Civil Code.
Former Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi emphasized the significance of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) as a vital step toward national integration. He stated that implementing the UCC does not conflict with Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution, which safeguard the right to religion. According to Gogoi, the UCC can foster unity while respecting religious freedoms. This view supports the Constitution’s aim of promoting equality and unity among different communities.
The Supreme Court collegium, led by CJI Sanjiv Khanna, conducted interviews for high court judgeships to improve candidate evaluation. This follows controversies involving Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav’s remarks at a VHP event, raising concerns about judicial impartiality. The collegium aims to enhance transparency and integrity in judicial appointments through personal interactions.
Former Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud emphasized that judges should be careful when making public comments, referring to an Allahabad High Court judge’s statement on the Uniform Civil Code (UCC). He explained that judicial restraint is important to protect the integrity of the institution. Chandrachud also revealed that in 2018, as a consultee judge, he had opposed the promotion of the same judge, Justice Yadav, due to concerns.
![[Atul Subhash Suicide] A New Plea Filed In SC Calls for Preliminary Inquiry in Dowry and Sexual Offence Cases, UCC Implementation](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Uniform-civil-code-2.jpg?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
A Supreme Court petition has been filed seeking preliminary inquiries in cases of dowry harassment and sexual offences, while advocating for a Uniform Civil Code. The petition highlights concerns over the misuse of women’s rights, calls for legal consolidation to enhance efficiency, and requests virtual hearings for individuals outside court jurisdictions.
Justice Shekhar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court is under scrutiny for controversial remarks made at a VHP event, suggesting that “law works according to the majority.” His statements have drawn criticism and raised concerns about judicial neutrality. The Supreme Court collegium is set to review the situation as calls for his impeachment grow.
On December 12, 2024, LawChakra hosted a live discussion with journalist Saurav Das, covering issues in India’s judicial system, including the Uniform Civil Code, marital rape criminalization, and corruption. Das emphasized the need for systemic reforms, judicial independence, and the importance of judges adhering to constitutional ideals while addressing media influence and accountability.
Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav’s roster at Allahabad High Court is updated, effective December 16, limiting him to first appeals from district court orders filed up to 2010. This change follows controversy over his remarks regarding the Muslim community, prompting calls for his impeachment and reassigning sensitive cases to other justices.