Uttarakhand High Court seeks Centre, State response to pleas against Uniform Civil Code

The Uttarakhand High Court on Wednesday issued notice to the Central and Uttarakhand governments in a batch of pleas challenging the validity of certain provisions of the Uniform Civil Code brought into force by the State..A Bench of Chief Justice G Narendar and Justice Ashish Naithani granted the respondents six weeks to file their responses.The petitions were filed by two individuals, Almasuddin Siddiqui and Ikram, challenging the Code on the grounds that it violates the fundamental rights of Muslims and other citizens under Articles 14, 19, 21, and 25 of the Constitution, as well as essential religious practices of the Muslim community.The High Court clubbed the petition with other pleas challenging the UCC and scheduled the matter for hearing after six weeks..Representing the petitioners, advocate Kartikey Hari Gupta today argued that the laws prescribed in the Quran and its verses constitute an essential religious practice for Muslims and the UCC, which governs these religious matters, contradicts Quranic teachings.The petitioners further contended that the 2024 Code violates Article 245 of the Constitution, as it functions as a state law with extra-territorial jurisdiction.Additionally, they raised objection to the mandatory registration of live-in relationships and the penal provisions for non-compliance, arguing that these requirements violate the right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution..Opposing the pleas, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union and State, argued that the Uniform Civil Code does not apply to persons belonging to Scheduled Tribes as they are granted specific protection under Part XXI of the Constitution. He asserted that all Scheduled Tribes, as defined under Article 366(25) read with Article 342, constitute a distinct class and therefore, no discrimination arises.Regarding the customs and practices among Muslims permitting marriage within the "degrees of prohibited relationships" as defined in the UCC, Mehta directed the Court’s attention to Schedules 1 and 2 of the Code, which outline these prohibited relationships. He contended that the provisions are clearly defined within the framework of the Code.He added that such marriages amongst close relatives should be regulated by law and prohibited in any civilized society..At this stage, the petitioners' counsel argued that there should be no objection to a Muslim man marrying his mother's sister's daughter or mother's brother's daughter.In response, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta countered that for the petitioners to succeed on this ground, they must establish a fundamental right for an individual to marry their sister. Failing this, he asserted, they cannot challenge a provision essential to any civilized society.The Court eventually asked the Centre and States to file their replies..Another plea filed advocate Aarushi Gupta is already pending before the Court.That plea has challenged key provisions concerning the scope of application of the UCC, the requirements to register marriages and the registration or termination of live-in relationships as unconstitutional.In particular, it has called into question the validity of Sections 3(c), 3(n)(iv), 4 (iv), 8, 11, 13, 25 (3), 29, 32(1) and (2), 378, 380(1), 384, 381, 385, 386, and 387 of the Uttarakhand UCC 2025, as well as the corresponding rules.All three petitions will now be heard together.