Opinion | Uniform Civil Code And The Primacy of Constitutional Rights Over Personal Laws

Updated: Jul 06, 2026 16:49 pm IST Published On Jul 06, 2026 16:48 pm IST Last Updated On Jul 06, 2026 16:49 pm IST

Published On Jul 06, 2026 16:48 pm IST

Last Updated On Jul 06, 2026 16:49 pm IST

Democracies sometimes confront a difficult question: when religious customs, practices, or scriptures conflict with the principles of equality, liberty, and particularly gender justice, which should prevail? A secular state cannot evade this dilemma by retreating behind claims of religious neutrality, non-interference, or the guise of endless consensus-building. Unlike a theocratic state, its foremost obligation is not to preserve religious tradition but to safeguard the constitutional rights of its citizens.

This principle is particularly relevant to the contemporary debate on the future of Muslim personal law in India and the move towards a Uniform Civil Code (UCC). At its core, the debate concerns the relationship between constitutional citizenship and religion-based personal law regimes. The central question is whether individual rights should remain subordinate to religious norms or whether the Constitution should guarantee justice irrespective of faith.

The framers of the Indian Constitution had anticipated this conflict. During the Constituent Assembly debates on what became Article 44, a Directive Principle of State Policy that directs the State to endeavour to secure a Uniform Civil Code for all citizens, several members recognised that a modern democratic republic could not indefinitely sustain separate personal laws. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar argued that personal laws were not beyond legislative reform and that the State had historically intervened in matters previously regarded as religious whenever justice and constitutional principles required it.

The inclusion of Article 44 in the Constitution was therefore deliberate. It reflected the constitutional aspiration to establish a Uniform Civil Code........

© NDTV