Uniform Civil Code: A Solution to India’s Minority Appeasement Politics

• India’s secular framework has evolved to favor minority communities, subjecting Hindus to stricter regulations while allowing minorities to retain their personal laws, leading to systemic bias.
• Successive governments have hesitated to implement a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) due to political appeasement and fear of backlash from minority groups, despite constitutional provisions advocating legal uniformity.
• Hindu society perceives the current legal system as discriminatory, with state control over Hindu institutions, while minority communities enjoy autonomy, fueling the demand for equal treatment through UCC.
• International criticism of the UCC initiative contradicts Western legal standards, where uniform civil laws are already enforced, highlighting a double standard in the global discourse on India’s legal reforms.
• Proponents argue that implementing a Uniform Civil Code would ensure equal rights for all citizens, address demographic concerns, and end decades of preferential treatment in India’s legal framework.

India serves as a striking example of a nation where secularism has been redefined to disproportionately favor minority communities through the application of different civic laws based on religion. Under the pretext of secularism, the state exercises extensive control over the majority Hindu community, imposing restrictions and interventions while turning a blind eye to deeply entrenched and often exploitative practices within minority groups. This deliberate and preferential treatment has transformed secularism into a political instrument for minority appeasement, effectively deterring successive governments from implementing its true principles of equality and fairness.

The term “secularism” was not initially included in the Indian Constitution when it was first enacted. It was incorporated through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976, which introduced the word “secular” into the Preamble. According to the new provisions, secularism in India signifies a Republic where all religions receive equal respect. This Indian conceptualization of secularism differs significantly from its Western counterpart, which emphasizes a strict separation between religion and state. Instead, the Indian model prioritizes equal treatment and respect for all religions rather than maintaining a rigid divide between religious and state affairs.

The Indian Constitution, in effect, enables state-backed interference in religious affairs and permits financial support for religious institutions and activities. Yet, the so-called secular provisions are frequently applied in a biased and lopsided manner, seemingly to placate minority communities. While deep-rooted social evils like untouchability, the practice of Sati, and child marriage were long eradicated within Hindu society through legal intervention, the state continues to drag its feet when it comes to addressing regressive practices sanctioned under Muslim Personal Law—such as polygamy, Halala, and child marriage—revealing a stark and deliberate double standard.

Even when India enacted legislation in 2019 to prohibit the exploitative practice of Triple Talaq, a form of instant divorce practiced in Islam[1], it was met with significant opposition from left-liberal groups. These factions characterized the legislation as an attack on the rights of Muslim minorities despite the 2017 Supreme Court ruling that declared Triple Talaq unconstitutional.[2]

The first government of independent India, led by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, codified and standardized various personal laws applicable to the Hindu community during the 1950s.[3] This effort resulted in establishing specific legal frameworks such as the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 and the Hindu Succession Act of 1956. However, the government refrained from enacting similar reforms for other religious communities. Consequently, many in the Hindu community perceive this selective legal intervention as a historical injustice.

The perceived disparity has fueled the demand for a “One Nation One Law” in India, commonly called the Uniform Civil Code or UCC. Experts argue that the immediate post-independence period would have been the ideal time to introduce a common set of civil laws applicable to all citizens, regardless of their religious affiliations. The relentless pursuit of minority appeasement has left Hindus as the sole community shackled by a so-called secular civil code. Meanwhile, religious minorities freely govern their civic affairs under their own religious laws, while the Hindu majority has been subjected to a steady dismantling of their civic rights through an onslaught of legislation.

Despite the persistent calls for uniformity in civil law, successive governments have been reluctant to introduce the UCC in Parliament due to concerns about its potential impact on minority communities. The Uniform Civil Code Bill was introduced in 2019 and again in 2020 but was withdrawn without being introduced in the parliament.[4]

The bill faced strong opposition from Muslim minority groups, and its proponents were accused of harboring anti-Muslim sentiments. This narrative, largely driven by left-liberal factions, led to the issue being shelved for a significant period. However, in recent years, the Indian government has revisited the subject, opting for a phased approach to its implementation. In 2024, Uttarakhand became the first state in India to pass legislation to adopt the Uniform Civil Code, which was formally implemented in January 2025. [5]

In the subsequent sections, this discussion will delve into the diverse perspectives and controversies surrounding the enactment of the Uniform Civil Code in India. Additionally, it will explore how such a law has the potential to address longstanding grievances within the Hindu community, thereby rectifying perceived historical injustices resulting from decades of minority appeasement.

Minority Appeasement: The Root of Legal Inequality

The concept of “One Nation One Law” falls within the purview of Article 44 of the Indian Constitution, which explicitly states that the state shall endeavor to secure a uniform civil code for all citizens throughout the territory of India. This provision is enshrined in Part IV of the Constitution under the Directive Principles of State Policy. Although these principles are not legally enforceable, they serve as guiding beacons for the formulation of relevant legislation.[6]

According to various media sources, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of the Indian Constitution, advocated for implementing a uniform civil code at the national level. An article published in The New Indian Express, authored by Dr. H.V. Hande, who wrote Ambedkar and the Making of the Indian Constitution, offers more profound insights into this subject. Emphasizing the necessity of a Uniform Civil Code, the article highlights that when Article 44 was introduced by Dr. Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly on 23rd November 1948, several Muslim members proposed amendments. These amendments sought to include provisions ensuring that no group, section, or community would be compelled to relinquish its personal laws. Following extensive discussions, Dr. Ambedkar ultimately declined to accept these proposed amendments.

Now I must confess that I was very much surprised at that statement, for the simple reason that we have in this country a uniform code of laws covering almost every aspect of human relationship. We have a uniform and complete Criminal Code operating throughout the country, which is contained in the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code. We have the Law of Transfer of Property, which deals with property relations and is operative throughout the country. Then there are the Negotiable Instruments Acts, and I can cite innumerable enactments that would prove that this country has practically a Civil Code, uniform in its content and applicable to the whole country.[7]

Furthermore, through several landmark judgments, the Supreme Court of India has reiterated the importance of enacting a uniform civil code. One of the most significant rulings in this context was delivered in the 1985 Shah Bano case. Shah Bano, who was divorced by her husband through the practice of triple talaq after forty years of marriage, sought maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Supreme Court ruled in her favor, applying Section 125, which is universally applicable regardless of an individual’s religious affiliation. In delivering the judgment, the Supreme Court urged Parliament to take appropriate measures to enact a uniform civil code.[8]

However, the verdict in the Shah Bano case became a contentious political issue, as radical Islamist factions and certain political entities characterized the judgment as an encroachment upon Muslim Personal Law and an affront to the rights of the Muslim minority to manage their civil affairs independently. In response to mounting pressure, the government of that era, led by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, enacted the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act in 1986.[9] This legislation effectively nullified the Supreme Court’s ruling by restricting a divorced Muslim woman’s entitlement to maintenance to a period of 90 days following the divorce, known as the iddat period.[10]

Another notable judicial pronouncement that emphasized the need for a uniform civil code was the 1995 Sarla Mudgal case. This case examined the complexities arising from conflicts between personal laws, particularly in instances of religious conversion. The legal issue at hand was whether a Hindu man, married under Hindu law, could contract a second marriage after converting to Islam. The Supreme Court ruled that conversion to Islam solely for the purpose of a second marriage constituted an abuse of personal laws. The court held that a Hindu marriage could only be dissolved under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and that conversion to another religion with the intent to remarry contravened Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with the offense of bigamy.[11]

Former Chief Justice of India and Member of Parliament in the Rajya Sabha, Ranjan Gogoi, recently described the UCC as a highly progressive legislative initiative and a constitutional objective that should be implemented following the establishment of broad public consensus.[12]

Gogoi’s comments have attracted criticism from various quarters, notably left-liberal groups and radical Islamist factions. Asaduddin Owaisi, President of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), strongly opposed Justice Gogoi’s views in a post on the social media platform X:

“Is he saying that India is not united? He defended the NRC in Assam, which caused large-scale distress & sowed divisions. Yet it also simply disproved his belief that the state was overrun with illegal migrants”.[13]

The Indian left-liberal media has been particularly critical of the Uniform Civil Code initiative, accusing the Indian government of undermining the principle of secularism. Critics argue that the UCC would compel minority communities to abandon their personal laws in favor of a uniform legal framework. International media has also spread misinformation and biased views about India’s efforts to implement the UCC. The Western media, in particular, has often characterized the initiative as an attempt by a so-called “Hindu majoritarian” government to impose its ideological agenda on minority communities.

Additionally, significant criticism has been directed at specific provisions of the Uttarakhand UCC, particularly the requirement for the mandatory registration of live-in relationships. Certain media outlets, such as the BBC[14], have strongly opposed this measure, describing it as an instance of excessive societal surveillance infringing upon young individuals’ personal freedoms and choices.

Western Media’s Hypocrisy on UCC

The Western media has largely portrayed the idea of UCC in India in a negative light, suggesting that the implementation of a uniform civil code across the country would constitute an infringement on the rights of minorities, particularly the Muslim community. This criticism appears paradoxical when juxtaposed with the legal frameworks of many Western democracies, which already incorporate several elements of uniform civil law. For instance, numerous countries have established a minimum legal age for marriage that applies universally, irrespective of religious affiliation. In Wales and England, for example, the legal marriage age is set at 18, with provisions allowing marriage under this age only with parental consent. However, in nations such as Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Germany, marriage under 18 is strictly prohibited, even with parental approval.[15]

Child marriage is unequivocally banned in most Western countries due to the uniform application of legally prescribed minimum marriage ages to all citizens, regardless of religious background. Therefore, it’s pretty telling how the Western media, always quick to champion human rights and progressive values, conveniently turns a blind eye when it comes to child marriage within the Muslim community in India. Their glaring double standards expose a hypocritical approach that reeks of ideological bias rather than genuine concern for human rights.[16]

A fundamental aspect of the UCC initiative is the standardization of marriage laws. In many Western democracies, civil codes mandate the compulsory registration of marriages with government authorities. Countries such as Germany, France, Italy, and Brazil exemplify this approach[17], where individuals can observe their respective religious marriage rituals. Still, legal recognition is contingent upon official registration with state authorities. In contrast, India’s marriage registration framework is complex, stemming from distinct legal provisions governing different religious communities. For instance, under Muslim Personal Law, marriages are registered with a Qazi, which inadvertently confers a quasi-legal status to child marriages in the absence of a uniform civil code applicable to all Indian citizens. Such legal intricacies further underscore the necessity for implementing the UCC Law in India.

Minority appeasement is not just an issue in India; it has also caused serious problems in Western countries. The clash between radical Islamist beliefs and local cultural values has led to many cases of violence and crimes against women. In the United Kingdom, radical Islamist groups have practically taken over many parts of the country. Since the 1980s, Sharia councils or courts have been operating in the UK. They were originally set up to help Muslim communities settle marriage disputes using Islamic family law. However, over time, these councils have become controversial because they enforce strict, outdated rules that discriminate against women. Even though they have no official legal power, experts worry that their decisions are being taken more seriously, which could unintentionally create new legal standards.[18]

Incoming U.S. President Donald Trump highlighted the potential threats posed by Islamic Sharia law to the progressive values of Western societies. During his first term (1917-1920), legislative measures were introduced in multiple U.S. states to prohibit the application of Sharia law in American courts.[19] Despite these efforts, the left-liberal media persistently downplayed the exploitative and discriminatory aspects of Sharia, framing opposition to it as Islamophobia—a narrative that continues to persist into 2025. Against the backdrop of persistent radical Islamist appeasement in the Western world, particularly in Europe, the enactment of a uniform civil code in India assumes heightened significance. Such a legal framework is essential not only for upholding the true spirit of secularism in India but also for safeguarding the interests of the Hindu majority, which faces increasing demographic challenges due to religious conversions.

Opposition to the UCC initiative in India is primarily driven by a coalition of radical Islamist groups and left-liberal factions, who collaborate with global Islamist networks to foment communal discord and advocate for a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam. This alliance seeks to thwart efforts to establish a uniform civil code by fostering controversy and unrest along religious lines.

It is worth noting that several Islamic countries have adopted a secular civil code that integrates some aspects of Sharia while incorporating progressive legal provisions to align with contemporary societal norms. Countries such as Turkey and Egypt exemplify this balanced approach, where legal frameworks reflect Islamic influences but also impose limitations on the application of Sharia in specific areas. For instance, the practice of triple talaq, or instant divorce, has been outlawed in various Muslim-majority nations, including Pakistan, Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, Indonesia, and Iraq.[20]

Nevertheless, India’s enactment of legislation banning triple talaq in 2019 was met with significant resistance from the Muslim community and left-liberal factions. The discourse surrounding Muslim-related issues in India is primarily dominated by a radical Islamist elite that collaborates with left-liberal entities to influence public opinion on contentious matters. Consequently, it remains uncertain whether the perspectives presented as representative of the Muslim community genuinely reflect the views of ordinary Muslim citizens or are merely the product of a well-orchestrated narrative propagated by vested interests.

UCC: Addressing Historical Injustices

The concept of “One Nation One Law” has garnered widespread support, particularly from the majority Hindu community in India. Hindus view it as a way to correct historical injustices within the legal system. Since independence, Hindus have been subject to a secular civil code, while religious minorities have followed their laws. Advocates believe implementing a uniform law will ensure equal treatment for all, addressing the longstanding disadvantages Hindus have faced.

Firstly, a uniform civil code for all religions could help manage the worrisome demographic imbalances in the country. Right now, Muslim Personal Law allows practices like child marriage, polygamy, and triple talaq, which have led to population changes that are a great source of concern for the Hindu community. A uniform civil code would curb these practices and contribute to restoring demographic balance.[21]

A Uniform Civil Code (UCC) could help address issues like “Love Jihad,” where Hindu women are allegedly tricked into converting to Islam through deception, such as hiding their religious identity. By requiring the registration of marriages and live-in relationships, as seen in Uttarakhand’s UCC plan, the law could help prevent such cases by ensuring identity checks and penalties for fraud.

A Uniform Civil Code could also help free Hindu temples from government control by creating fair rules for all religious places. Unlike other religious groups, Hindu temples are still managed by the government because of old laws from colonial times and policies made after independence that limit their freedom. [22]

Our platform, ‘Stop Hindudvesha.Org,’ has pointed out in a series of articles that the state control of Hindu temples in India is a historical phenomenon since its origins from British colonial regulations to post-independence laws that continue to place Hindu temples under government management, affecting the cultural heritage of the Hindu society and their religious freedom.[23] The persistence of minority appeasement politics has further exacerbated this issue, turning Hindu sacred sites into platforms for socio-political experimentation under ideologically driven governance.

Therefore, it is imperative to introduce a uniform legal framework that encompasses religious institutions of all communities under an equitable set of regulations.

Wrapping up

In his thought-provoking book, Hindus in Hindu Rashtra: Eighth-Class Citizens and Victims of State-Sanctioned Apartheid, Anand Ranganathan provides a detailed examination of what he terms “state-sanctioned apartheid” against Hindus within the so-called Hindu Rashtra. The author addresses critical issues such as the State’s control over Hindu temples, the 1995 Waqf Act, and the Places of Worship Act of 1991, which, according to him, legally discriminate against Hindus. The book offers an in-depth analysis of various legislative measures that, while favoring non-Hindu communities, allegedly target Hindus.

Furthermore, the book explores how Hinduism’s inherent openness to reform has led to a unique situation in India, wherein the religion is subjected to continuous transformation, whereas the State, in the name of minority appeasement, permits the persistence of exploitative practices within religions such as Islam. The author emphasizes that this perspective does not argue against the need for reform within Hinduism but rather seeks to underscore the perceived double standards employed by state institutions when dealing with different religious communities.

Although the book does not explicitly discuss the concept of “One Nation, One Law,” it offers the reader valuable insights into the necessity of a uniform civil code in India.

While One Nation, One Law may not serve as a comprehensive solution to all the challenges faced by Hindus in India, the book argues that it would establish a crucial precedent in curbing the politics of minority appeasement and fostering a legal framework where all religions are treated equitably, irrespective of their majority or minority status.

Citations

[1] Factsheet details:;   https://pib.gov.in/FactsheetDetails.aspx?Id=148565&reg=3&lang=1

[2] Triple talaq: India Muslim women in limbo after instant divorce ruling;  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-62805107

[3] LawBeat | Dispelling Suspicions: How the Uniform Civil Code benefits the Hindu community; https://lawbeat.in/columns/amp/dispelling-suspicions-how-uniform-civil-code-benefits-hindu-community

[4] ‘PM’s Secular Civil Code proposal much needed’ – The Sunday Guardian Live; https://sundayguardianlive.com/news/pms-secular-civil-code-proposal-much-needed

[5] Uttarakhand govt clears UCC rules, set to be rolled out after local body elections | Political Pulse News – The Indian Express;  https://indianexpress.com/article/political-pulse/uttarakhand-clears-ucc-rules-9788945/

[6] All western democracies have features of the Uniform Civil Code in their civil law; https://hindupost.in/law-policy/all-western-democracies-have-features-of-the-uniform-civil-code-in-their-civil-law/

[7]  Uniform Civil Code, as perceived by Dr BR Ambedkar;  https://www.newindianexpress.com/opinions/2023/Jul/27/uniform-civil-code-as-conceived-by-dr-b-r-ambedkar-2599259.html

[8] What is Uniform Civil Code;   https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/why-uniform-civil-code-is-necessary-for-india-1477037384-1

[9] Right Word | Uniform Civil Code: That Part of Shah Bano Case Which We Missed And Must Revisit – News18;  https://www.news18.com/opinion/right-word-uniform-civil-code-that-part-of-shah-bano-case-which-we-missed-and-must-revisit-8235535.html

[10] Shah Bano Case:  When Rajiv Gandhi surrendered to Muslim hardliners; https://www.opindia.com/2020/08/shah-bano-case-rajiv-gandhi-surrender-muslim-hardliners-supreme-court-order-overturn/

[11] What is Uniform Civil Code;  https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/why-uniform-civil-code-is-necessary-for-india-1477037384-1

[12] Uniform Civil Code key to  national integration; need consensus for implementation: Ex-CJI Ranjan Gogoi; https://www.deccanherald.com/india/uniform-civil-code-key-to-national-integration-need-consensus-for-implementation-ex-cji-ranjan-gogoi-3362837

[13]  Does Gogoi think India is not united, asks Asad;   https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/telangana/2025/Jan/21/does-gogoi-think-india-is-not-united-asks-asad-3

[14] Uttarakhand UCC: Indian state wants to govern live-in relationships; https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-68224969#

[15] All western democracies have features of the Uniform Civil Code in their civil law;    https://hindupost.in/law-policy/all-western-democracies-have-features-of-the-uniform-civil-code-in-their-civil-law/

[16] Assam: Indian women protest against child marriage mass arrests; https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-64495567

[17] All western democracies have features of the Uniform Civil Code in their civil law;  https://hindupost.in/law-policy/all-western-democracies-have-features-of-the-uniform-civil-code-in-their-civil-law/

[18] https:// researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents / CDP-2019 – 0102 / CDP – 2019 – 0102.pdf;  https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2019-0102/CDP-2019-0102.pdf

[19] Anti-sharia laws proliferate as Trump strikes hostile tone towards Muslims | US news | The Guardian;    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/30/anti-sharia-laws-trump-muslims

[20] What is Triple Talaq and list of countries where it is banned?; https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/muslim-countries-where-triple-talaq-is-banned-1490788669-1

[21] LawBeat|  Dispelling Suspicions: How the Uniform Civil Code benefits the Hindu Community; https://lawbeat.in/columns/amp/dispelling-suspicions-how-uniform-civil-code-benefits-hindu-community

[22] ibid

[23] State Control of Hindu Temples in India: A Historical Perspective;  https://stophindudvesha.org/state-control-of-hindu-temples-in-india-a-historical-perspective/