AHEMADABAD WOMENS

ACTION GROUP VS UNION OF

INDIA (AIR 1997, 3 SCC 573)
By – Namitha P
3rd BBA LLB
SECULARISM – INDIAN CONTEXT
• The core ethos of India has been a fundamental unity, tolerance and even synthesis of religion.
It is an indubitable fact that hundreds of millions of Indians belonging to diverse religions lived
in comity through the ages, marred through at times by religion revolts, economic exploitation
and social suppression being often at the bottom of it all.

• The Preamble of Indian Constitution aims to constitute India a Sovereign, Socialist, Democratic
Republic. The terms socialist and secular were added to it by the 42nd amendment. The whole
constitution is summarized in the preamble. It is the mirror to the spirit of the constitution. The
arrangement of the words in the preamble is also very significant. Indian society is a multi-
religious society, it is having different caste, religion along with several religion diversification.
So, all these are the divisive factor in some way or the other and if not handled carefully then
can cause a threat to the unity and integrity of the nation.
THREAT TO SECULARISM IN INDIA
• Communalism
• Politics and Religion
• Limited interpretation of secularism
• The Defective educational system
• Minority group perspection
UNIFORM CIVIL CODE – UCC
• UCC is one that would provide for one law for the entire country, applicable to all
religious communities in their personal matters such as marriage, divorce,
inheritance, adoption etc.
• Article 44 of the Constitution lays down that the state shall endeavour to secure a
UCC for the citizens throughout the territory of India.
• Article 44 is one of the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP).
• DPSP as defined in Article 37, are not justiciable (not enforceable by any court) but the
principles laid down therein are fundamental in governance.
CHALLENGES
• Exceptions in Central Family Laws
• Communal Politics
• Constitutional Hurdle
Ahmedabad Women’s Action Group Vs.
Union of India
• Facts
• Three writ petitions were filed before the Supreme Court by Ahmedabad Women’s Action Group (AWAG),
all filed as a Public Interest litigation. The petitioners’ relief prayed includes to challenge several aspects of
Law:
• In W.P. (C) No. 494/96 relief prayed are:
• To declare the existence of polygamy as void as offending Articles 14 and 15 of the constitution.
• To declare void the existence of Unilateral Talaq
• To declare polygamy as an act of cruelty vis-à-vis sec.2 of Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act
• To declare The Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce Act 1986) void under the constitution of India
• To declare the provision of Shia and Sunni laws of Inheritance void as discriminating against females only
on the ground of sex.
• In W.P. (C) No. 196/96 relief prayed are:
• For repeal of s. (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955.
• For repeal of s.3 (2), 6 and 9 of Hindu minority and Guardian ship act.
• To declare s. 6 of Guardians and wards Act void.
• The Court to declare void the discretion allowed to a Hindu spouse to make
testamentary disposition without providing for a spouse and dependents
• In W.P (C) No. 721/96.
• The prayer sought in the third petition was to declare Sections 10 and 34 of Indian
Divorce Act void and also to declare Sections 43 to 48 of Indian Succession Act
void.
ISSUES
• Whether it is necessary that the legislature should make law uniformly applicable
to all religions?
• Whether the Court should interfere in the matters of unification of Personal Laws
or not?
Ratio decidendi
• Neither the Hindu Succession Act, nor even the Shariat law is applicable to the
custom-governed tribal.
• Section 494, Penal code Which makes bigamy an offence applies to Parsis,
Christians and others, but not to Muslims because of their respective religious
texts which embody their own
• Distinctive backgrounds.
Judgement
• “The Court at the very outset commented that these Writ Petitions do not
deserve disposal on merits inasmuch as the arguments advanced before it
wholly involves issues of State policies with which the Court will not ordinarily
have any concern. Further, Court found that when similar attempts were made,
of course by others, on earlier occasions this Court held that the remedy lies
somewhere else and not by knocking at the doors of the courts.”
• The court felts that a uniform law, though is might desirable, enactment thereof in
one go perhaps may be counter-productive to unity and integrity of the nation. In
a democracy governed by rule of law, gradual progressive change and order
should be brought about.
SIMILAR CASES
• State of Bombay v. Narasu Appa Mali AIR 1952 Bom 84
• Maharishi Avadhesh vs. Union of India (1994 (supp) I SCC /18
CONCLUSION
• India is a country that allows its citizen to practice and propagate any religion of
their choice despite being rich in its own culture and heritage. As mentioned in the
preamble of our constitution, India is a Sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic,
and republican country. On the contrary, Article 44 also directs the state to enact
uniform laws for its citizens, creating confusion among themselves. Hence many
PILs are filled in the honorable courts demanding that their rights are infringed by
their personal laws. The Honorable Courts, by its judgments in various cases, have
said that it does not come under their jurisdiction as that power lies with the
legislature to make/amend or repels the law on the same. Hence, there are various
discussions which are supporting/oppose the Uniform Civil Code. In my opinion,
the uniform civil code shall enact so that there shall be gender equality and
support national integration.