Unfinished Task

Context:  The presence of exceptions in family laws throughout India militates against the constitutional provisions of the Uniform Civil Code. All states must be brought into the mainstream of family laws. 

Issues with diverse family laws:

• Anti-thesis to constitutional conformity in family law: under the provision of Article 44 where the focus of provision is on the inter-personal diversity rather than on its territorial applicability.

• Violates citizens right to equality (Article 14) before the law and equal protection of the law (Article 15) guaranteed under the Constitution.

Exceptions to family laws in India:

• Jammu and Kashmir: Exclusionary provisions had emanated from Article 370 of the Constitution,

• However, The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Act and the Jammu and Kashmir (Reorganisation) Act in 2019 have extended all central laws and repealed parallel local laws.

• Union Territory of Pondicherry:  Pondicherry (Laws) Act of 1968 extended all the central family law Acts to Pondicherry but not to renoncants (those who choose the Code Napoleon of 1804, during the French rule).

• Goa: The Portuguese rulers had recognised locally prevailing personal laws by the name “native customs and usages”, and is still ruled by the Portuguese Civil Code.

• Daman and Diu: The position in Daman and Diu after their merger with Dadra and Nagar Haveli in 2019 to form a single Union territory is yet uncertain.

• Nagaland and Mizoram: Articles 371A and 371G of the Constitution, decree that no parliamentary legislation will replace the customary law and religion-based system for its administration in both these states unless so demanded by the local legislatures. 

Conclusion: Like Jammu and Kashmir, other territories like Goa, Daman and Diu, Puducherry, Nagaland and Mizoram should also be brought into the country’s mainstream of family laws.