Government has hidden agenda behind Uniform Civil Code implementation i.e. to make marriage laws more women friendly by diverting/forcing common people mind in communal direction. For this, agenda of triple talaq is being raised all over the country. But the reality is that, Uniform Civil Code would affect all the communities.
It is also being said that “Now it is for the Muslim Personal Law Board to consider whether they want to be part of the stakeholders or they want to be an individual identity... ". Indirectly Govt. is trying to make it a Hindu vs Muslim issue for their vote bank.
The previous UPA government in 2010 had initiated a move to bring a Bill in Parliament to make marriage laws more women friendly. The UPA government had struggled for a consensus on the bill. It was finally passed in August, 2013 in the Upper House but could not be cleared by the Lower House.
Then in September, 2014, because of numerous representations from people and organisations opposing the provisions of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, for the time being they had put it on hold.
As I said earlier, Uniform Civil Code would affect all the communities. Let’s see the truth/hidden agenda behind implementation of UCC.
It had been proposed that in the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, the following provisions shall be inserted named as 13(C), (D), (E) & (F):
‘13C (1) A petition for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce may be presented to the district court by either party to a marriage, on the ground that the marriage has broken down irretrievably.
(2) The court hearing a petition referred to in sub-section (1) shall not hold the marriage to have broken down irretrievably unless it is satisfied that the parties to the marriage have lived apart for a continuous period of not less than three years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition.
(3) If the court is satisfied, on the evidence as to the fact mentioned in subsection (2), then, unless it is satisfied on all the evidence that the marriage has not broken down irretrievably, it shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, grant a decree of divorce.
(4) In considering, for the purpose of sub-section (2), whether the period for which the parties to a marriage have lived apart has been continuous, no account shall be taken of any one period (not exceeding three months’ in all) during which the parties resumed living with each other, but no other period during which the parties lived with each other shall count as part of the period for which the parties to the marriage lived apart.
(5) For the purposes of sub-sections (2) and (4), a husband and wife shall be treated as living apart unless they are living with each other in the same household, and reference in this section to the parties to a marriage living with each other shall be construed as reference to their living with each other in the same household.
13D. (1) Where the wife is the respondent to a petition for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13C, she may oppose the grant of a decree on the ground that the dissolution of the marriage will result in grave financial hardship to her and that it would in all the circumstances, be wrong to dissolve the marriage.
(2) Where the grant of a decree is opposed by virtue of this section, then,—
(a) if the court finds that the petitioner is entitled to rely on the ground set out in section 13C; and
(b) if, apart from this section, the court would grant a decree on the petition, the court shall consider all the circumstances, including the conduct of the parties to the marriage and the interests of those parties and of any children or other persons concerned, and if, the court is of the opinion that the dissolution of the marriage shall result in grave financial hardship to the respondent and that it would, in all the circumstances, be wrong to dissolve the marriage, it shall dismiss the petition, or in an appropriate case stay the proceedings until arrangements have been made to its satisfaction to eliminate the hardship.
13E. The court shall not pass a decree of divorce under section 13C unless the court is satisfied that adequate provision for the maintenance of children born out of the marriage has been made consistently with the financial capacity of the parties to the marriage.
Explanation.— In this section, the expression “children” means—
(a) minor children including adopted children;
(b) unmarried or widowed daughters who have not the financial resources to support themselves; and
(c) children who, because of special condition of their physical or mental health, need looking after and do not have the financial resources to support themselves.
‘13F (1) Without prejudice to any custom or usage or any other law for the time being in force, the court may, at the time of passing of the decree under section 13C on a petition made by the wife, order that the husband shall give for her and children as defined in section 13E, such compensation which shall include a share in his share of the immovable property (other than inherited or inheritable immovable property) and such amount by way of share in movable property, if any, towards the settlement of her claim, as the court may deem just and equitable, and while determining such compensation the court shall take into account the value of inherited or inheritable property of the husband.
(2) Any order of settlement made by the court under sub-section (1) shall be secured, if necessary, by a charge on the immovable property of the husband.’.
So, am repeating again that Government has hidden agenda behind Uniform Civil Code implementation i.e. to make marriage laws more women friendly by diverting/forcing common people mind in communal direction. For this, agenda of triple talaq is being raised all over the country. But the reality is that, Uniform Civil Code would affect all the communities.
So from my point of view, Uniform Civil Code =U.C.C. Unnecessary communal clash. Are these only formula left out for national integration? Are we morally, intellectually so bankrupt that we have no other formula for national integration? Are we forced to think in the communal ways? Are we made to think according to corrupted and polluted brains? Can we not see the motive of such opinion makers?
Indirectly Govt. is trying to make it a Hindu vs Muslim issue for their vote bank. But the reality is that, Govt. is trying to make marriage laws more women-friendly.
Originally posted here