Public Interest Litigation Filed in Uttarakhand High Court Contesting the State’s Proposed Uniform Civil Code
(Judicial Quest News Network)
A legal petition has been filed before the Uttarakhand High Court, challenging several provisions of the state’s newly implemented Uniform Civil Code (UCC). The petition, moved by advocate Aarushi Gupta, contends that while the UCC seeks to address discriminatory practices, certain provisions impose unreasonable restrictions and violate fundamental rights, including the right to privacy and the right to autonomy.
Key Provisions Under Scrutiny
The petitioner has specifically targeted multiple sections of the Uttarakhand UCC 2025, including Sections 3(c), 3(n)(iv), 4(iv), 8, 11, 13, 25(3), 29, 32(1) & (2), 378, 380(1), 381, 384, 385, 386, and 387, along with the corresponding rules. The challenge primarily questions the constitutionality of the scope and application of the UCC, which the petitioner argues is excessively broad, especially regarding the registration of marriages, the registration of live-in relationships, and the requirements for residents under the code.
Concerns over Definition of “Resident” and Discrimination Against Minority Communities
One of the primary objections raised by the petitioner is the broad definition of “resident” in the UCC, which applies to any individual who has lived in Uttarakhand for a year or more. The petitioner argues that this definition is so expansive that it could unfairly subject non-residents from other states to the provisions of the UCC, violating their right to privacy and autonomy.
Additionally, the petitioner contends that the UCC disproportionately reflects the customs of the majority Hindu community, neglecting the practices of minority religious groups such as Muslims and Parsis. The UCC provisions on marriage, including the prohibitions on marriages between closely related individuals, are cited as examples of this bias, with the petitioner noting that these definitions are based on the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 and do not take into account the differing customs of minority religions.
The Issue of Polygamy and Divorce
The petitioner also challenges provisions related to polygamy and divorce under the UCC, particularly Section 25, which provides additional grounds for divorce if the husband has more than one wife. The petitioner highlights that while the law does not permit polygamy, certain Muslim sects allow polygamous marriages as a matter of custom. The inclusion of this provision, according to the petitioner, disregards these religious practices and discriminates against Muslims.
Live-In Relationships and LGBTQ+ Rights
Another significant aspect of the petition concerns the exclusion of LGBTQ+ couples from the UCC’s provisions on live-in relationships. The petitioner points out that the UCC lacks a clear definition of the duration required for a couple to be recognized as being in a live-in relationship, a requirement crucial for registration. The imposition of penalties for failing to register such relationships—ranging from three to six months of imprisonment or fines of Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 25,000—is viewed as excessive and potentially prone to misuse, leading to harassment.
Moreover, the petitioner questions the requirement for individuals to inform their legal guardians or parents before entering a live-in relationship, even though individuals aged 18 and above are legally allowed to marry without such conditions. This inconsistency, according to the petitioner, infringes upon individual rights and privacy.
Overreach of Authorities and Concerns of Harassment
The petition further criticizes the excessive powers granted to registrars in determining whether individuals in a live-in relationship are indeed cohabiting, arguing that such matters should not be left to the discretion of local authorities. The requirement for individuals to disclose their previous relationships also violates their right to privacy, the petitioner asserts.
Additionally, provisions related to criminal prosecution for minor violations, particularly when one partner is from another state, are seen as an unnecessary burden. The petitioner argues that such provisions are likely to lead to unjust legal consequences and harassment.
Legal and Constitutional Concerns
In conclusion, the petitioner recognizes the importance of the Uniform Civil Code in addressing issues of discrimination, particularly in areas like women’s rights, maintenance, divorce, and child marriage. While the petitioner acknowledges the need for a uniform legal framework in Uttarakhand, they argue that many provisions of the UCC violate fundamental rights, including the right to privacy, the right to life, and the right to personal autonomy. The petition calls for a reassessment of these provisions to ensure that they align with constitutional principles and do not unduly restrict individual freedoms or discriminate against minority communities.
The petition is listed for admission hearing .
