The Madhya Pradesh government has introduced the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) Bill, 2026 in the state’s Legislative Assembly. This action occurred on July 20, following approval from the state cabinet, which was chaired by Chief Minister Mohan Yadav. Minister Gautam Tetwal presented the Bill, emphasising its intended purpose of ensuring equal rights for citizens across different communities.

Tetwal remarked on the diversity of customs practised by various sects and communities, advocating for uniform marriage practices across the board. He raised concerns about certain traditional practices, particularly in Islam, noting issues such as polygamy and triple talaq—a practice that permits divorce through a single declaration by the husband. According to Tetwal, the proposed law aims to eliminate such practices while establishing a legal framework for marriage within the state.

Additionally, the Bill stipulates that both brides and grooms must be of a minimum age—18 and 21 years, respectively—before marriage. It also mandates the registration of marriages, ensuring that children born from these unions have equal rights to their father’s property and name.

Reactions from Government Officials and Congress

Minister Inder Singh Parmar characterised the UCC as a long-awaited necessity, arguing that it would promote equality under the law. He questioned why property rights have historically differed based on religion and caste, asserting that such disparities have led to societal dissatisfaction. Parmar expressed hope that the Bill would rectify these imbalances and provide equal rights for all citizens.

In his statements, Minister Parmar also critiqued the Congress party for its opposition to the UCC, suggesting that their discomfort arises from a long-standing policy of appeasement. He claimed that the Congress had previously introduced laws causing inequity and that their resistance to the UCC reflects a desire to maintain these divides.

However, the Congress party has protested against the introduction of the UCC Bill, claiming it was conducted without proper notice and was not part of the agenda for the day. Congress MLA Arif Masood labelled the government’s actions as ‘deceitful’, alleging that the Bill was presented in a manner akin to a thief’s behaviour. He questioned the urgency of its introduction and argued that discussions about such significant legislation should be held transparently.

Concerns Over Specific Provisions of the Bill

Masood expressed particular concern regarding provisions that address live-in relationships. He questioned the rationale behind legalising live-in arrangements while simultaneously imposing restrictions on marriage. In his view, this duality reveals inconsistencies in the proposed legal framework.

Another Congress MLA, Atif Aqueel, called attention to the need for protections for Muslim citizens under the UCC. He argued that, just as Scheduled Tribes have been exempted from the UCC, Muslims should also receive similar considerations. Aqueel emphasised that the Constitution guarantees freedom for all, and he insisted on the importance of maintaining such freedoms.

Notably, the UCC Bill was not included in the Assembly’s original agenda and was introduced during ongoing proceedings, raising additional questions about the government’s approach to legislative matters. As discussions continue, both supporters and opponents of the Bill remain firm in their respective positions.

Long or Short, get news the way you like. No ads. No redirections. Download Newspin and Stay Alert, The CSR Journal Mobile app, for fast, crisp, clean updates!

App Store –  https://apps.apple.com/in/app/newspin/id6746449540 

Google Play Store – https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.inventifweb.newspin&pcampaignid=web_share