The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said that any attempt by the Narendra Modi government to introduce a uniform civil code would be “an unconstitutional and anti-minority move”.
The AIMPLB’s comment came in the wake of UP Deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya saying that the state was planning to introduce a uniform civil code.
Besides Maurya, Uttarakhand Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami has also said that his government was preparing the first draft of a uniform civil code. Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Jairam Thakur, too, said that his government would look to implement the uniform civil code in the hill state.
AIMPLB general secretary Hazrat Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani said, "The Constitution of India allows every citizen to lead a life according to his religion, and it has been included in the Fundamental Rights. Under this right, different personal laws have been kept for minorities and tribal classes according to their wishes and traditions, which does not cause any harm to the country."
The AIMPLB said that it helped in maintaining mutual unity and trust between the majority and the minority and “rhetoric of uniform civil code by Uttarakhand or Uttar Pradesh governments or the Centre was nothing but an attempt to divert attention from burning issues like inflation, falling economy and rising unemployment and to further the agenda of hatred”.
The Supreme Court has five petitions pending before it that demand uniformity in civil laws in the country on five aspects -- age of marriage, divorce, succession, maintenance and adoption.
All petitions were filed by BJP leader and Supreme Court lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay in 2020. In one of them, the apex court has issued notice to the Centre, which is yet to respond.
The petition seeking uniform age of marriage demands that the marriageable age for both men and women should be increased to 21 years. The remaining four PILs have the same demand -- either the Supreme Court should direct the government to “remove anomalies” in different laws or it should frame guidelines itself to declare such “discriminatory grounds” of succession, adoption, maintenance and divorce as unconstitutional.
Explaining why he filed the petitions, Upadhyay said, "Uniformity in minimum age of marriage, grounds of divorce, maintenance and alimony, adoption and guardianship and succession and inheritance are essential to secure gender justice, gender equality and dignity of women. These issues are basic ingredients of the right to life, liberty and dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."
Terming Article 44 (Uniform Civil Code) the soul of our Constitution, Upadhyay said that successive governments had failed to implement it due to appeasement politics.
"Article 37 very clearly states that directive principles are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country and being custodian of the Constitution and protector of fundamental rights, the Supreme Court cannot be a mute spectator for eternity," the Supreme Court lawyer said.
Upadhaya said that despite the law declaring triple talaq illegal, verbal talaq Talaq-e-Hasan and Talaq-e-Ahsan were still in practice. He said that in all other religions, divorce could be done only by judicial process.