Law Commission begins consultations on Uniform Civil Code; seeks views from public, religious bodies
New Delhi, Jun 14: The Law Commission on Wednesday initiated a fresh consultation process on uniform civil code by seeking views from stakeholders, including public and recognised religious organisations, on the politically sensitive issue.
Earlier, the 21st Law Commission, whose term ended in August 2018, had examined the issue and solicited the views of all stakeholders on two occasions. Subsequently, a consultation paper on "Reforms of Family Law" was issued in 2018.
"Since more than three years have lapsed from the date of issuance of the said consultation paper, bearing in mind the relevance and importance of the subject and also the various court orders on the subject, the 22nd Law Commission of India considered it expedient to deliberate afresh over the subject," the panel said in a 'public notice'.
The 22nd Law Commission, which recently got a three-year extension, has accordingly begun examining issues related to UCC on a reference sent by the Ministry of Law and Justice in June 2016.
"Accordingly, the 22nd Law Commission of India decided again to solicit views and ideas of the public at large and recognised religious organisations about the Uniform Civil Code," the statement said.
Those who are interested and willing can present their views within a period of 30 days from the date of notice to the Law Commission.
If need be, Commission may call upon any individual or organisation for a personal hearing or discussion, it said.
In its consultation paper issued on August 31, 2018, the 21st Law Commission headed by Justice B S Chauhan (retd) had said that while the diversity of Indian culture can and should be celebrated, specific groups or weaker sections of the society must not be "dis-privileged" in the process.
It said the Commission dealt with laws that are discriminatory rather than providing a uniform civil code "which is neither necessary nor desirable at this stage".
The consultation paper said most countries are now moving towards recognition of difference, and the mere existence of difference does not imply discrimination but is indicative of a robust democracy.
In short, a uniform civil code means having a common law for all citizens of the country that is not based on religion. Personal laws and laws related to inheritance, adoption and succession are likely o be covered by a common code.
Implementation of a uniform civil code has been part of the BJP's election manifestos.
States such as Uttarakhand are in the process of framing their common code. The BJP had promised a uniform civil code in Karnataka ahead of the recent assembly elections.
The then law minister Kiren Rijiju had told Rajya Sabha in a written reply in December 2022 that states were empowered to enact personal laws that decide issues such as succession, marriage and divorce, in their endeavour to secure a uniform civil code.
Article 44 of the Constitution, part of the Directive Principle of State Policy, provides that the State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
CJI calls for 'unified judicial policy', use of technology to converge practices across courts
Jaisalmer (PTI): Pushing for a "unified judicial policy", Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Saturday said technology can help align standards and practices across courts, creating a "seamless experience" for citizens, regardless of their location.
He said high courts -- due to the federal structure -- have had their own practices and technological capacities, and "regional barriers" can be broken down with technology to create a more unified judicial ecosystem.
Delivering the keynote address at the West Zone Regional Conference in Jaisalmer, Kant proposed the idea of a "national judicial ecosystem" and called for an overhaul of India's judicial system with the integration of technology.
"Today, as technology reduces geographical barriers and enables convergence, it invites us to think of justice not as regional systems operating in parallel, but as one national ecosystem with shared standards, seamless interfaces, and coordinated goals," he said.
He emphasised how the role of technology in the judiciary has evolved over time.
"Technology is no longer merely an administrative convenience. It has evolved into a constitutional instrument that strengthens equality before the law, expands access to justice, and enhances institutional efficiency," he said, highlighting how digital tools can bridge gaps in the judicial system.
Kant pointed out that technology enables the judiciary to overcome the limitations of physical distance and bureaucratic hurdles.
"It allows the judiciary to transcend physical barriers and bureaucratic rigidities to deliver outcomes that are timely, transparent and principled," he said, adding that the effective use of technology can modernise the delivery of justice and make it more accessible to citizens across the country.
The CJI called for implementing a "unified judicial policy".
He said India's judicial system has long been shaped by its federal structure, and different high courts have their own practices and technological capacities.
"India's vast diversity has led to different high courts evolving their own practices, administrative priorities and technological capacities. This variation, though natural in a federal democracy, has resulted in uneven experiences for litigants across the country," he said.
Kant underscored that predictability is crucial for building trust in the judicial system.
"A core expectation citizens place upon the courts is predictability," he said, adding that citizens should not only expect fair treatment but also consistency in how cases are handled across the country.
He pointed to the potential of technology in improving predictability.
"Technology enables us to track systemic delays and make problems visible rather than concealed," he said.
By identifying areas where delays occur, such as in bail matters or cases involving certain types of disputes, courts can take targeted action to address these issues and improve efficiency, Kant said.
The CJI explained that data-driven tools could identify the reasons behind delays or bottlenecks, allowing for faster, more focused solutions.
"Technology enables prioritisation by flagging sensitive case categories, monitoring pendency in real time and ensuring transparent listing protocols," he said.
Justice Surya Kant also discussed the importance of prioritising urgent cases where delays could result in significant harm. He highlighted his recent administrative order that ensures urgent cases, such as bail petitions or habeas corpus cases, are listed within two days of curing defects.
"Where delay causes deep harm, the system must respond with urgency," he stated, explaining that technology can help courts identify and expedite such cases.
Kant also raised the issue of the clarity of judicial decisions.
He noted that many litigants, despite winning cases, often struggle to understand the terms of their judgment due to complex legal language.
"Although the orders had gone in their favour, they remained unsure of what relief they had actually secured because the language was too technical, vague or evasive to understand," he said.
He advocated for more uniformity in how judgments are written.
"A unified judicial approach must therefore extend to how we communicate outcomes," he said.
The CJI also discussed the role of AI and digital tools in improving case management. He pointed to the potential of AI-based research assistants and digital case management systems to streamline judicial processes.
"Emerging technological tools are now capable of performing once-unthinkable functions. They can highlight missing precedent references, cluster similar legal questions, and simplify factual narration," he said, explaining how these technologies can help judges make more consistent decisions.
He also highlighted tools like the National Judicial Data Grid and e-courts, which are already helping to standardise processes like case filings and tracking.
Kant reiterated that the integration of technology into the judicial process is not just about improving efficiency but about upholding the integrity of the system and strengthening public trust.
"The measure of innovation is not the complexity of the software we deploy, but the simplicity with which a citizen understands the outcome of their case and believes that justice has been served," he said.
