Abstract

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) represents one of the most enduring and constitutionally significant debates in post-Independence India. Enshrined as a Directive Principle of State Policy under Article 44 of the Constitution of India, the UCC aspires to replace the existing pluralism of religion-based personal laws with a single, secular, and uniform civil framework governing marriage, divorce, inheritance, maintenance, and adoption for all citizens irrespective of religious affiliation. This research paper undertakes a comprehensive legal analysis of the UCC through a dual lens: constitutional jurisprudence and comparative international law. It examines the constitutional basis and tensions inherent in the UCC directive, traces the evolution of the Supreme Court's jurisprudence from Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985) to Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017) and beyond, critically evaluates the gender-discriminatory provisions embedded in major personal law systems, surveys the experience of comparative legal systems including France, Turkey, Germany, Tunisia, and Morocco, assesses India's obligations under international human rights instruments including the ICCPR and CEDAW, and examines the Goa Civil Code as a domestic proof of concept. The paper concludes that a carefully designed, consultatively developed, and rights-based UCC is both constitutionally mandated and practically achievable, and offers concrete suggestions for the way forward.

Keywords