BENGALURU, APRIL 6 2025 — In a significant judicial observation, the Karnataka High Court on Friday urged both the Parliament and State Legislatures to make every effort to enact a Uniform Civil Code (UCC). The Court stated that implementing a UCC is essential to achieving the ideals of justice, equality, and fraternity outlined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India.
The observation came from a single-judge bench led by Justice HanchateSanjeevkumar, who stressed the need for legal uniformity across religions, particularly to ensure equal treatment of women under all personal laws.
“ENACTMENT OF UCC WILL ENSURE JUSTICE AND EQUALITY FOR ALL WOMEN”
Justice Sanjeevkumar stated that despite all women in India being equal citizens under the Constitution, religion-based personal laws create inequalities among women, denying them equal rights.
“The Court is of the opinion that bringing a law on Uniform Civil Code and its enforcement certainly give justice to women, achieve equality of status and opportunity for all and accelerate the dream of equality among all women in India irrespective of caste and religion and also assure dignity individually through fraternity. Therefore, the enactment of a law on Uniform Civil Code will truly achieve the objects of the principles enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the Court is of the opinion that it should make a request to the Parliament and State Legislatures to make every endeavour to enact a statute on Uniform Civil Code.”
COMPARISON OF HINDU AND MAHOMEDAN LAWS
In his remarks, Justice Sanjeevkumar noted the progressive nature of Hindu law, which grants daughters and wives equal rights, but pointed out that similar rights are not guaranteed under Mahomedan law.
“A ‘Woman’ in Hindu Law is having birth right equal to that of Son being a Daughter. When under Hindu Law a daughter is given equal status and right in all respects enjoying rights as that of son, the same is not so under Mahomedan Law. Therefore, the Court is of the opinion that our Country needs Uniform Civil Code in respect of their Personal Laws and Religion, only then the object of Article 14 of the Constitution of India will be achieved. A ‘Daughter’ under Hindu Law is having equal status/right/entitlement and interest as that of Son and in case of wife she is having equal status as that of husband, this is more or like fulfilling object and principle enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, but it is not so under the Mahomedan Law.”
THE CASE BEHIND THE OBSERVATIONS
The Court made these remarks while hearing a property dispute among the legal heirs of Abdul Basheer Khan, who died intestate (without a will), leaving behind ancestral and self-acquired properties.
After his death, his children entered into a dispute over the partition of these properties. One of his daughters, Shahnaz Begum, was allegedly excluded from the inheritance. Her husband, Sirajuddin Macci, represented her posthumously and filed a suit for partition and separate possession in the City Civil Court, Bengaluru.
TRIAL COURT AND HIGH COURT DECISIONS
In November 2019, the trial court ruled in favor of Shahnaz Begum, granting her a 1/5th share in three joint family properties. However, other properties were not included in the partition.
Three other legal heirs — Samiulla Khan, Noorulla Khan, and Rahath Jan — challenged the decision in the Karnataka High Court, claiming the properties were not ancestral. Simultaneously, Sirajuddin filed a cross-objection, seeking a larger share and inclusion of additional properties.
The High Court
- Upheld the lower court’s ruling on the three properties being joint family assets.
- Confirmed Shahnaz Begum’s legal right to a 1/5th share.
- Dismissed the cross-objection, stating that the additional properties were not proven to be joint family in nature.
LEGAL REPRESENTATION
- Advocate Irshad Ahmed represented the appellants.
- Advocate Mohamed Sayeed appeared for the respondent.
A BROADER CALL FOR LEGAL REFORM
This case, while centered on a family property dispute, carries wider implications. The Court’s strong pitch for the Uniform Civil Code has once again brought the debate into the national spotlight. By emphasizing equality before law and women’s rights, the judgment reiterates the importance of consistent civil laws across religious communities.
