<p>The Delhi High Court has stressed the need for a Uniform Civil Code in respect of marriage, divorce, succession, etc, so that settled principles, safeguards, and procedures can be laid down and citizens are not made to struggle due to the conflicts and contradictions in various personal laws.</p>.<p>"The hope expressed in Article 44 of the Constitution that the State shall secure for its citizens Uniform Civil Code ought not to remain a mere hope," it said.</p>.<p>A single judge bench of Justice Pratibha Singh said in modern Indian society, which is gradually becoming homogenous, the traditional barriers of religion, community, and caste are slowly dissipating. </p>.<p>The youth of India belonging to various communities, tribes, castes, or religions who solemnise their marriages ought not to be forced to struggle with issues arising due to conflicts in various personal laws, especially in relation to marriage and divorce, the court said.</p>.<p>It also pointed out the need for a Uniform Civil Code as envisioned under Article 44 of the Constitution has been reiterated from time to time by the Supreme Court. </p>.<p>"The Supreme Court had in 1985 directed that the judgment in Ms Jordon Diengdeh to be placed before the Ministry of Law to take appropriate steps. However, more than three decades have passed since then and it is unclear as to what steps have been taken in this regard till date," the bench said.</p>.<p>The court directed the copy of its judgement should be communicated to the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India, for necessary action as could be deemed appropriate.</p>.<p>The High Court passed its judgement while setting aside a trial court's order, which dismissed a divorce petition filed by a man on his wife's assertion that both of them belonged to 'Meena' community, a notified Scheduled Tribe, and the Hindu Marriage Act would not apply to them.</p>.<p>The court noted that in the instant case, the marriage had taken place as per Hindu customs and rites. "If members of a tribe voluntarily choose to follow Hindu customs, traditions and rites, they cannot be kept out of the purview of the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955," the court said. </p>.<p>"Codified statutes and laws provide for various protections to parties against any unregulated practices from being adopted. In this day and age, relegating parties to customary courts when they themselves admit that they are following Hindu customs and traditions would be antithetical to the purpose behind enacting a statute like the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955," it added.</p>
<p>The Delhi High Court has stressed the need for a Uniform Civil Code in respect of marriage, divorce, succession, etc, so that settled principles, safeguards, and procedures can be laid down and citizens are not made to struggle due to the conflicts and contradictions in various personal laws.</p>.<p>"The hope expressed in Article 44 of the Constitution that the State shall secure for its citizens Uniform Civil Code ought not to remain a mere hope," it said.</p>.<p>A single judge bench of Justice Pratibha Singh said in modern Indian society, which is gradually becoming homogenous, the traditional barriers of religion, community, and caste are slowly dissipating. </p>.<p>The youth of India belonging to various communities, tribes, castes, or religions who solemnise their marriages ought not to be forced to struggle with issues arising due to conflicts in various personal laws, especially in relation to marriage and divorce, the court said.</p>.<p>It also pointed out the need for a Uniform Civil Code as envisioned under Article 44 of the Constitution has been reiterated from time to time by the Supreme Court. </p>.<p>"The Supreme Court had in 1985 directed that the judgment in Ms Jordon Diengdeh to be placed before the Ministry of Law to take appropriate steps. However, more than three decades have passed since then and it is unclear as to what steps have been taken in this regard till date," the bench said.</p>.<p>The court directed the copy of its judgement should be communicated to the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India, for necessary action as could be deemed appropriate.</p>.<p>The High Court passed its judgement while setting aside a trial court's order, which dismissed a divorce petition filed by a man on his wife's assertion that both of them belonged to 'Meena' community, a notified Scheduled Tribe, and the Hindu Marriage Act would not apply to them.</p>.<p>The court noted that in the instant case, the marriage had taken place as per Hindu customs and rites. "If members of a tribe voluntarily choose to follow Hindu customs, traditions and rites, they cannot be kept out of the purview of the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955," the court said. </p>.<p>"Codified statutes and laws provide for various protections to parties against any unregulated practices from being adopted. In this day and age, relegating parties to customary courts when they themselves admit that they are following Hindu customs and traditions would be antithetical to the purpose behind enacting a statute like the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955," it added.</p>
