SC to study scope of uniform grounds of upkeep, alimony for all

The Supreme Court on Wednesday, whereas expressing “great caution”, agreed to look at the chance of “gender-neutral religion-neutral uniform guidelines” for upkeep and alimony.

It additionally determined to look into whether or not the Law Commission of India might be requested to counsel ‘uniform grounds of divorce’ throughout faiths.

The petitioner, advocate A.K. Upadhyay, argued that divorce, upkeep and alimony legal guidelines in sure religions discriminated and marginalised girls. These anomalies, various from one faith to one other, have been violative of the proper to equality (Article 14 of the Constitution) and proper towards discrimination (Article 15) on the idea of faith and gender and proper to dignity.

However, a three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sharad A. Bobde requested Mr. Upadhyay if what he actually needed was the “destruction of personal laws” itself.

“You want all personal laws to be abolished?”, Chief Justice Bobde requested senior advocate Pinky Anand, who argued the plea for uniform grounds of divorce.

Ms. Anand stated the petitioner was solely asking for elimination of the anomalies within the assorted legal guidelines of divorce adopted within the land.

“But it cannot be done without abolishing personal laws… You are actually asking the court to demolish personal laws”, the CJI said.

Uniform Civil Code

“Personal laws are not protected under Article 13”, Ms. Anand argued. She then referred to the Uniform Civil Code (UCC).

Chief Justice Bobde stated, “That [UCC] is for the government to do… The government can do anything. The government has the pulse of the people, or at least, that is what they should have… How can we as a court destroy personal law? Can we revoke discriminatory practices without destroying personal law?”.

The Articles in query contemplated violations by the State towards the elemental rights of residents. On the opposite hand, these “discriminatory” private regulation practices have been imposed by residents of a selected religion towards the ladies of their very own group. “Articles 14 and 15, etc, operate as an injunction against the State”, the CJI said.

Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, additionally for Mr. Upadhyay, stated it was the State’s accountability to intervene if private regulation practices led to marginalisation and discrimination. “The State has to ensure that religions should be practised in accordance with the Constitution. State should step in when religious practices directly infringe on fundamental rights”, she submitted.

Mr. Upadhyay’s petition stated that “even after 73 years of Independence and 70 years of India becoming a socialist secular democratic Republic, laws relating to maintenance and alimony are not only complex and cumbersome but also against the constitutional mandate of being equal, rational and just”.

He famous the varied legal guidelines that govern the customs of marriage, divorce and alimony throughout religions.

“Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains are governed by the Puucho Marriage Act 1955 and the Puucho Adoption & Maintenance Act 1956. Muslims are dealt as per status of valid marriage and prenuptial agreement and governed under the Muslim Women Act 1986. Christians are governed under the Indian Divorce Act 1869 and Parsis under the Parsi Marriage & Divorce Act 1936, but none of these laws are gender neutral,” the petition stated.