Last Updated on March 10, 2026 6:17 pm by INDIAN AWAAZ
Staff Reporter / New Delhi
The Supreme Court has observed that the time has come for a Uniform Civil Code, UCC. The Apex court termed a plea seeking striking down of provisions of the Shariat law of 1937 for being discriminatory to Muslim women as a very good case which advisably only the legislature should look into.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and R Mahadevan said if the court struck down the Shariat inheritance law, it would create a legal vacuum, as there is no statutory law governing Muslim inheritance.
The remarks came while the court was hearing a petition related to alleged discrimination against Muslim women under existing personal laws.
Best to defer it to legislative wisdom: SC
Justice Bagchi noted that simply striking down personal laws could create a legal vacuum. Instead, he suggested that it would be more appropriate for Parliament to frame a comprehensive law.
To declare personal laws void and create a vacuum … it is best to defer it to legislative wisdom so that the legislature brings about a law on uniform civil code. This court has already recommended uniform civil code. See, for a Muslim man, he can divorce unilaterally, by any procedure you follow. Can we declare all bigamous relations founded on personal law as invalid? No. So we have to defer to legislative power to bring fundamental duties, in effect,” Justice Bagchi said.
According to the bench, the judiciary cannot easily invalidate practices rooted in personal law without creating complications in family law matters such as marriage, divorce and inheritance.
CJI Surya Kant echoed this view during the hearing, indicating that a Uniform Civil Code may offer the most practical solution to address the issue.
Plea challenged Muslim Personal Law
The case before the Court involves a challenge to provisions of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, which governs aspects of marriage, divorce and succession among Muslims in India.
Petitioners argued that certain provisions of the law discriminate against Muslim women, particularly in matters of inheritance and succession.
Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioners, told the Court that under Sharia-based inheritance rules, women often receive a smaller share compared to men. He suggested that if the 1937 Act were declared unconstitutional, succession could instead be governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925, which provides equal inheritance rights.
Court raises concern about legal vacuum
The bench, however, raised an important question: what legal framework would replace the existing one if the 1937 law were struck down? CJI Surya Kant cautioned against judicial intervention that could unintentionally reduce existing rights available to Muslim women.
The Court observed that removing the current law without a ready alternative could create uncertainty about which legal provisions would govern succession and family matters.
Justice Bagchi also pointed out that personal laws might continue to apply through Article 372 of the Constitution of India, which allows pre-existing laws to remain in force unless specifically repealed.
Debate gains fresh momentum
The Supreme Court’s remarks have once again pushed the Uniform Civil Code into the national spotlight. The concept of a UCC, which is mentioned in Article 44 of the Constitution, envisions a single set of civil laws governing all citizens in matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance and adoption, regardless of religion.
Supporters argue that such a law would promote gender equality and legal uniformity, while critics caution that it must be implemented carefully to respect India’s cultural and religious diversity.