New Delhi : The Central government is in favour of a Uniform Civil Code, but would it enacted within the domain of Parliament and not the courts, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court. The submission was made in response to a petition filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta He had such a gender neutral and religion neutral law should come into force to govern divorce, inheritance, guardianship and maintenance. “Uniform Civil Code is desirable. But this is a legislative aspect. Cannot be decided on a writ petition,” Mehta told the court.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and Justice P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala agreed with the submission. The Bench said that the court could not direct the Parliament to enact a law. “SG Mehta submits that as a matter of policy Centre does support UCC but such an intervention in these batch of cases can be only through the parliament. We are not inclined to entertain this under Article 32,” the Bench said. The CJI explained to the petitioner that the court is an incorrect forum to raise the issue. It is up to the Parliament to effectuate the Uniform Civil Code. “Entertaining this would mean directing enactment of law and mandamus cannot be issued to parliament to enact a law. We see no reason to also ask it to be considered by law commission as it would aid in legislation. This plea is disposed of”, the Court said. The court also rejected Upadhyay’s plea to withdraw the petition. “We will say you can pursue your remedies. But we have disposed it off,” the court said. The Central government had earlier this year opposed the petitions on the ground that the issues raised in it fall within the domain of the legislature. Moradabad college denies entry to Burqa-clad students for violating uniform code Recently the Kerala High Court had called for the framing of a Uniform Civil Code for marriage and divorce in India. The court emphasised the need to establish legal safeguards to protect the spouse who files for divorce and said that it is necessary to first bring a common marriage code.
