Bengaluru: Why did a bench of the Karnataka High Court request the Parliament and state legislatures to go in for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC)?
Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar is of the opinion that only an UCC can grant equal rights to women of all communities.
“The Court is of the opinion that bringing a law on Uniform Civil Code and its enforcement certainly give justice to women, achieve equality of status and opportunity for all and accelerate the dream of equality among all women in India irrespective of caste and religion and also assure dignity individually through fraternity. Therefore, the enactment of a law on Uniform Civil Code will truly achieve the objects of the principles enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the Court is of the opinion that it should make a request to the Parliament and State Legislatures to make every endeavour to enact a statute on Uniform Civil Code,” Justice Sanjeevkumar observed on Friday.
The court was hearing an appeal by a Muslim woman (represented by her husband), seeking equal distribution of family property among brothers and sisters. The court was unable to grant her relief as Muslim Personal Law dictates otherwise. Under Muslim Personal Law, a daughter does not enjoy the rights that a son does. Even a wife is not treated as equal to her husband where distribution of property is concerned.
“A ‘Woman’ in Hindu Law is having birth right equal to that of Son being a Daughter. When under Hindu Law a daughter is given equal status and right in all respects enjoying rights as that of son, the same is not so under Mahomedan Law. Therefore, the Court is of the opinion that our Country needs Uniform Civil Code in respect of their Personal Laws and Religion, only then the object of Article 14 of the Constitution of India will be achieved. A ‘Daughter’ under Hindu Law is having equal status/right/entitlement and interest as that of Son and in case of wife she is having equal status as that of husband, this is more or like fulfilling object and principle enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, but it is not so under the Mahomedan Law,” the judgment further states.
