Let us understand Uniform Civil Code or One Law, One Nation - One of the most discussed and Important topic of 2023.

0:00 Introduction
1:39 What is Uniform Civil Code? 
3:00 History of Personal Laws in India 
4:04 Article 44 and Drafting Committee 
4:57 In what Areas do we need Uniformity 
6:12 Is UCC a Hindu-Muslim Debate? 
6:50 Important Case Laws (Shah Bano and Shayara Bano Case) 
10:02 Law Commissions on UCC 
11:13 Alternate Solution 
13:06 Can UCC be enforced: Art 44 and DPSP 
14:13 PROs and CONS of UCC 

To give you a brief, UCC is a proposal in India that is aimed at replacing personal laws based on religions, customs, and traditions with one common law for everyone irrespective of religion, cast, creed, sexual orientation, and gender.

This means that existing personal laws based on religion like the Hindu marriage act (1955), the Hindu succession act (1956), and the Muslim personal law application act (1937), will technically be dissolved. After Triple Talaq being declared Unconstitutional, other practices like Polygamy, Nikah Halala etc have been debatable and against Fundamental Rights of an individual.
Given the debate around the topic I have tried to explain the concept and its consequences inside-out.

From the history of personal laws to the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code, this video discusses everything and in an easy to understand manner.

Why is it in the news Now?

Because the Law Commission of India has invited people to share ideas from 14 June 2023 to 14 July 2023. If interested you can give your views here- https://legalaffairs.gov.in/law_commission/ucc/ or email at membersecretary-lci@gov.in

In case you have any query around the topic, please let us know in the comments section and we will answer them!

Hope you all liked the video!

Until 1950s, untouchability was legal in India You tell me, in today's date, even though exceptionally, I'm talking about the rarest of rare situations, should a person be allowed to marry 4 times?

In the case of succession and inheritance, males and females will get at least half of the share.

And Muslim women cannot claim maintenance like other Indian women.

We will discuss many more questions like this in today's video.

Hey everybody, I am Priya and in today's video we are going to talk about Uniform Civil Code.

Whether it comes or not, but the problems in the country are worth discussing.

Supreme Court is beating the stick and saying bring common civil code.

be any storm if they take any step for it.

All the laws in India are applied in the same way.

a murder or you have committed a murder, you will

There are already many uniform laws in India.

The biggest example of this is the Constitution of India.

Apart from this, there are many laws like the Contract Act, IPCC, etc.

There is only 1 exception to this uniformity, which is the personal laws, which vary from religion to religion.

are Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian, Parsi, all have their

own personal laws which create a lot of problems.

Let's understand what is the Uniform Civil Code.

Article 44, UCC, Saman Nagarik Sahinda, is a law which talks about bringing a uniform personal law for all Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis.

But in a country like ours, where there are 110 crore Hindus 20 crore Muslims, 4 crore Christians, 3 crore Sikhs in such a situation, that a uniform personal law will be brought so easily actually this statement is

not entirely true Because even during the time of independence, Hindus were the majority.

new country was created, a new partition was done, everything was done, new diversity.

Even in all these problems, in 1955, the Hindu Personal Code was passed.

Which means, yes, in 1955, the uniform codification of Hindu Personal Laws was done.

Because at the present time, the Supreme Court says that if you want to

bring any law, you should consult all the stakeholders and get their feedback But in the 1950s, there was

no such system So what happened in the 1950s?

to power, then we will pass the Hindu code bill.

Those elections were won and consent was accepted to win the election that the Hindu code bill should

be passed and this is how the Hindu vote bill came For example, BJP has also repeatedly talked about UCC in its election manifesto BJP has won

the election but can anyone consider winning the election as

Let's understand further Let's understand the history of personal laws in India.

the Hindu and Muslim angle and the British angle.

Hindus had Shastras, which were interpreted by Brahmins.

No matter what type of case it was, the answers were given in Shastras.

Similarly, Muslims had Sharia law, which was interpreted by the Kandis and the Nawabs.

Now, when East India Company came, they implemented English Common Law on their English subjects, for which courts were established.

But when it came to solving the dispute of Indian subjects, the question was which law would be followed?

Both Brahmins and Qazis were called to interpret the Shastra and Sharia law.

By 1862, high courts had been established in different parts of India and different religious laws were also being made like Hindu Widow Remarriage Act, Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, Hindu Inheritance Act, etc.

Similarly, laws were also codified for Muslims like Muslim Personal Law Application Act, Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act etc.

Means, till 1946, when the Indian Constitution's drafting committee was set up, this

Now, let's understand how Article 44 came into Indian Constitution.

When the drafting committee was set up, a

plan was made to bring in the Uniform Civil Code and a lot of debate was held on it.

add a proviso in Article 35, which says that no group, section or community will have any obligation to give up their personal love.

Some members said that UCC should be a part

opposed it, and finally, a majority of 5-4

decided that Uniform Civil Code should be included in the Directive Principle of State Policies and when the Constitution was enacted, it was covered by the UCC in Article

After this, a very intelligent question will be asked that what are the areas in which we need uniformity?

Because only when we know this, we can make uniform laws.

with some examples, how different are the personal laws of India.

First of all, IPC section 494, which says that if

someone marries another while being a living spouse, then it is a crime.

There is only 1 exception to this uniform law, that if a person is a Muslim, then he can marry 4 times.

Now, there can't be a uniformity in this, that you can marry as many times as you want, right?

Progressive world is monogamous, so uniformity will also be in the same line.

In Hindu law, Irritable breakdown of marriage is not a valid ground of divorce.

Next, Hindu women inherit equal share in property.

Whereas Muslim women, compared to male relatives, can inherit less than half of the share.

After this, Muslim women can't claim for long term maintenance like other Indian women And the most important difference is that Indian law prescribes uniform age for all religions for marriage which is 18 and 21 years and this is also being talked about increasing for development if marriage is done under this then it is child marriage and it is prohibited but 1 religion is allowed there are many more examples of different religions which are applied separately but wait a minute is UCC a Hindu Muslim debate?

Is UCC being radicalized by talking about society?

If I say it in a simple way, then it is a matter of removing such laws from the society which are discriminatory, derogatory, which are clearly wrong without any logic or law.

Imagine if legislators were asking everyone to remove untouchability and not to harm their religion.

It's high time we realize that they are legislators, not paper pleasers.

that who is supreme in personal law and constitutional law?

And can the Supreme Court interfere in personal laws?

To find the answer to this question, we need to look at some important cases of personal laws.

So if we look at some interesting cases from the beginning

1952 is a very important case in which a man was punished to get married twice in this law.

The convict said that this punishment is against my religion.

Because I did not have a son from my first wife and according to my religion, if my son didn't do my last rites, I won't

by the court, the act was declared valid and the person was punished for being a beggar.

At this point, we see some important cases of Muslim law At this point the most important and landmark case is Shahabano case In this case Shahabano was divorced

after 40 years of marriage and 5 children In Indian law

there is a provision CRPC section 125 which provides maintenance protection to Indian women.

After divorce, Shah Bano also claimed maintenance in section 125

and her husband filed an appeal against this maintenance.

Supreme Court has 5 judges and that is why it is called a landmark case.

The Supreme Court clearly stated that even Muslim women are entitled to protection under Section 125 of CRPC.

Along with this, it also stated in article 44 that if a uniform civil court comes, it will work for national integration and will provide better

Such a progressive judgment was overturned by the government by passing the Muslim Women Act.

This act says that Muslim women cannot claim protection under Section 125 and cannot demand maintenance under CRPC.

If we talk about recent times, the most important case is of Shaira Banu, which is also known as Triple Talaq Judgment.

In this case, Shaira Banu's husband pronounced triple talaq and divorced her.

Against which Shaira Bano filed a writ petition

in the Supreme Court and challenged 3 practices of Muslim law.

Nikah halala, polygamy and talaq-e-bidat.

Saying that these 3 practices are derogatory and discriminatory against which All India Muslim Personal Law Board said that because Muslim Personal Law is not codified it should get the

protection of Article 25 of the Constitution which means it cannot be judicially reviewed which means you cannot challenge Muslim personal law constitutionally In this case, Supreme Court declared triple talaq unconstitutional because it is not an essential religious practice and also said that if

you want to declare Nikah, Halala and polygamy unconstitutional then the right authority is with the Parliament Cut to 2023 In March, When a PIL was filed in front of

the UCC passed, the court said that the court is a wrong forum to enact the UCC.

Only the Parliament can make a law on this.

Recently, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that India also needs a uniform civil court and has always promised to implement it in the BJP election manifesto.

With this, India's 22nd Law Commission has asked for views and ideas from public and religious organizations on UCC.

Those who are interested can share their views by 14th July.

But the previous 21st Law Commission examined UCC in 2018 and asked for views from stakeholders.

Then in the report, the Law Commission called the UCC neither necessary nor desirable at this stage.

This first commission highlighted many practical difficulties.

For example, in Hindu Law, where marriage is considered

as a holy sacrament, in Christian Law, divorce is still stigmatized.

In Muslim Law, marriage is a contract And in Parsi laws registration of marriage is a very important ritual It is very important to respect all these attitudes and 1 religion cannot be imposed on another and if there is no consensus on UCC then the only

make changes in personal laws so that diversity is preserved and at the same time ensure that personal laws do not contradict fundamental rights It is also suggested that instead of bringing UCC we can remove the existing problems in personal laws and make them gender just Can all these problems be removed without bringing UCC?

In my opinion, yes we need to understand that the state has the power of

solve any social injustice for example when the Hindu code bill was brought the state used all the powers to solve the problems so to modify the Muslim law why is the UCC so special?

According to me, national interest comes first.

The basic human rights of the citizen are very important.

The dignity of the individual is very important.

If we don't even think of bringing the UCC in this case, then no desired result can be achieved.

should filter all the personal laws according to

are derogatory, discriminatory, against social justice should be declared unconstitutional.

According to me, the UCC or the Supreme Court's interference in the purse law does not pose a threat to diversity.

For example, uniformity does not mean that everyone will have to take 7 rounds to get married.

in the sense of marriage can mean that everyone will have to

And we already have a lot of uniform laws like constitution, contract.

Does Article 14 mean that everyone thought that

diversity will be in danger if equality comes into the country?

Does equal pay for equal work make people feel that diversity

It is very important to understand that the constitution is supreme and personal law has to be changed according to the constitution.

to change the constitution according to every personal law, then no constitution will be left.

Plus, it is also very important to understand how a law

We saw during the time of CAA, Farm Law and ongoing Manipur callings that the more important the

law is to be made, the more important it is to know how the law is being introduced.

So, special attention is needed on this too.

The most flawed side of the Uniform Civil Code is that the Uniform Civil Code, UCC, Directive Principle of State Policy,

Like the normal fundamental rights, you cannot enforce them

understand the difference between fundamental rights and DPSC.

When the country was independent, we had a lot of limitations.

that time, all the important rights, we guaranteed and protected them in the fundamental rights.

And we felt that as the country develops and progresses, we will adopt new rights.

The biggest example of this is the right to education.

So for the longest time, legislators and commissions felt that the country has not developed enough to provide free and compulsory education.

country will not progress until education

And as soon as this was realized, an amendment was made and

the right to education was incorporated into the fundamental right.

as the country progresses, new rights are adopted.

So what do you think, can the Uniform Civil Code be

Let's see some pros and cons generally discussed on the Uniform Civil Code.

So The biggest con is the mass perception that UCC is against religious freedom It is a sensitive task and it is very important to introduce this law and how it will be implemented is also important Because of diversity, practical difficulties can arise in execution and without state's help, it can be difficult to implement these laws fully.

The Indian states are quite divided regarding UCC.

These are the states that support UCC and these are the states that oppose it If we talk about the pros then it will provide gender equality provide equal status to all citizens promote national integration and in existing personal laws it will give scope to bring reforms and transformation So this was today's video on Uniform Civil Code I hope you learnt something new

share this video with your friends and family But whatever is said in this video, don't just stop there talk to people, discuss conflicting questions but in a civilized way because we are a part of a civilized nation.

So if you like this video, subscribe to the channel.

We upload a lot of videos on similar topics on this channel We also have an Instagram channel

We do polls on similar topics We ask interesting questions and

discuss FAQs You can subscribe to that as well That's it for now, see you in the next class, bye bye Bye-bye!


Speaker 0: Until 1950s, untouchability was legal in India You tell me, in today's date, even though exceptionally, I'm talking about the rarest of rare situations, should a person be allowed to marry 4 times? Should marriage be legal

Speaker 1: at a young age of 18? In the case of succession and inheritance, males and females will get at least half of the share. Is this legal? And Muslim women cannot claim maintenance like other Indian women. Why should

Speaker 0: this be acceptable? We will discuss many more questions like this in today's video. Hey everybody, I am Priya and in today's video we are going to talk about Uniform Civil Code. Whether it comes or not, but the problems in the country are worth discussing. Let's start today's video.

Speaker 2: Supreme Court is beating the stick and saying bring common civil code. Article

Speaker 0: 29,

Speaker 2: right to culture is a fundamental right. Run it and think again and

Speaker 3: again that there should not

Speaker 2: be any storm if they take any step for it.

Speaker 0: All the laws in India are applied in the same way. It means that if I have committed

Speaker 1: a murder or you have committed a murder, you will

Speaker 0: get the same punishment. This is called uniformity. There are already many uniform laws in India. The biggest example of this is the Constitution of India. Apart from this, there are many laws like the Contract Act, IPCC, etc.

There is only 1 exception to this uniformity, which is the personal laws, which vary from religion to religion. In India, there

Speaker 1: are Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian, Parsi, all have their

Speaker 0: own personal laws which create a lot of problems. Let's understand what is the Uniform Civil Code. Article 44, UCC, Saman Nagarik Sahinda, is a law which talks about bringing a uniform personal law for all Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis. But in a country like ours, where there are 110 crore Hindus 20 crore Muslims, 4 crore Christians, 3 crore Sikhs in such a situation, that a uniform personal law will be brought so easily actually this statement is

Speaker 1: not entirely true Because even during the time of independence, Hindus were the majority. So in the 1950s, when

Speaker 0: there was a new independence, a

Speaker 1: new country was created, a new partition was done, everything was done, new diversity. Even in all these problems, in 1955, the Hindu Personal Code was passed. Which means, yes, in 1955, the uniform codification of Hindu Personal Laws was done. How was this possible? Because at the present time, the Supreme Court says that if you want to

Speaker 0: bring any law, you should consult all the stakeholders and get their feedback But in the 1950s, there was

Speaker 1: no such system So what happened in the 1950s? Elections were fought Elections were

Speaker 0: said before that if we win, if we come

Speaker 1: to power, then we will pass the Hindu code bill. Those elections were won and consent was accepted to win the election that the Hindu code bill should

Speaker 0: be passed and this is how the Hindu vote bill came For example, BJP has also repeatedly talked about UCC in its election manifesto BJP has won

Speaker 1: the election but can anyone consider winning the election as

Speaker 0: implementing UCC? Let's understand further Let's understand the history of personal laws in India. We will understand

Speaker 1: the Hindu and Muslim angle and the British angle. Hindus had Shastras, which were interpreted by Brahmins. And kings used to execute them. No matter what type of case it was, the answers were given in Shastras. Similarly, Muslims had Sharia law, which was interpreted by the Kandis and the Nawabs.

Now, when East India Company came, they implemented English Common Law on their English subjects, for which courts were established. But when it came to solving the dispute of Indian subjects, the question was which law would be followed? Both Brahmins and Qazis were called to interpret the Shastra and Sharia law. By 1862, high courts had been established in different parts of India and different religious laws were also being made like Hindu Widow Remarriage Act, Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, Hindu Inheritance Act, etc. Similarly, laws were also codified for Muslims like Muslim Personal Law Application Act, Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act etc.

Means, till 1946, when the Indian Constitution's drafting committee was set up, this

Speaker 0: was the progress. Now, let's understand how Article 44 came into Indian Constitution. When the drafting committee was set up, a

Speaker 1: plan was made to bring in the Uniform Civil Code and a lot of debate was held on it. The UCC was in the draft in Article 35. During the

Speaker 0: discussion, Mohammad Ismail asked to

Speaker 1: add a proviso in Article 35, which says that no group, section or community will have any obligation to give up their personal love.

Speaker 2: Some members said that UCC should be a part

Speaker 1: of fundamental rights, some

Speaker 0: opposed it, and finally, a majority of 5-4

Speaker 1: decided that Uniform Civil Code should be included in the Directive Principle of State Policies and when the Constitution was enacted, it was covered by the UCC in Article

Speaker 0: 44.

Speaker 1: After this, a very intelligent question will be asked that what are the areas in which we need uniformity? Because only when we know this, we can make uniform laws. So I will tell you

Speaker 0: with some examples, how different are the personal laws of India. First of all, IPC section 494, which says that if

Speaker 1: someone marries another while being a living spouse, then it is a crime. There is only 1 exception to this uniform law, that if a person is a Muslim, then he can marry 4 times. That's an exception to our penal laws. Now, there can't be a uniformity in this, that you can marry as many times as you want, right? No.

Progressive world is monogamous, so uniformity will also be in the same line. In Hindu law, Irritable breakdown of marriage is not a valid ground of divorce. Next, Hindu women inherit equal share in property. Whereas Muslim women, compared to male relatives, can inherit less than half of the share. After this, Muslim women can't claim for long term maintenance like other Indian women And the most important difference is that Indian law prescribes uniform age for all religions for marriage which is 18 and 21 years and this is also being talked about increasing for development if marriage is done under this then it is child marriage and it is prohibited but 1 religion is allowed there are many more examples of different religions which are applied separately but wait a minute is UCC a Hindu Muslim debate?

Is UCC being radicalized by talking about society? If I say it in a simple way, then it is a matter of removing such laws from the society which are discriminatory, derogatory, which are clearly wrong without any logic or law. For example, we removed untouchability. Imagine if legislators were asking everyone to remove untouchability and not to harm their religion. It would have been so weird.

It's high time we realize that they are legislators, not paper pleasers. Next very important question is

Speaker 0: that who is supreme in personal law and constitutional law? And can the Supreme Court interfere in personal laws? To find the answer to this question, we need to look at some important cases of personal laws. So if we look at some interesting cases from the beginning

Speaker 1: of Indian legal history, then

Speaker 0: 1952 is a very important case in which a man was punished to get married twice in this law. The convict said that this punishment is against my religion. How? Because I did not have a son from my first wife and according to my religion, if my son didn't do my last rites, I won't

Speaker 1: get salvation. And Hindu religion at that time

Speaker 0: used to say that if you

Speaker 2: are not getting a

Speaker 0: son from your first wife, then you

Speaker 1: can marry again. All the arguments were rejected

Speaker 0: by the court, the act was declared valid and the person was punished for being a beggar. At this point, we see some important cases of Muslim law At this point the most important and landmark case is Shahabano case In this case Shahabano was divorced

Speaker 1: after 40 years of marriage and 5 children In Indian law

Speaker 0: there is a provision CRPC section 125 which provides maintenance protection to Indian women. After divorce, Shah Bano also claimed maintenance in section 125

Speaker 1: and her husband filed an appeal against this maintenance. Supreme Court has 5 judges and that is why it is called a landmark case. The Supreme Court clearly stated that even Muslim women are entitled to protection under Section 125 of CRPC. Along with this, it also stated in article 44 that if a uniform civil court comes, it will work for national integration and will provide better

Speaker 2: solutions at the time

Speaker 0: of conflicting ideologies. Such a progressive judgment was overturned by the government by passing the Muslim Women Act. This act says that Muslim women cannot claim protection under Section 125 and cannot demand maintenance under CRPC. If we talk about recent times, the most important case is of Shaira Banu, which is also known as Triple Talaq Judgment. In this case, Shaira Banu's husband pronounced triple talaq and divorced her.

Against which Shaira Bano filed a writ petition

Speaker 1: in the Supreme Court and challenged 3 practices of Muslim law. Nikah halala, polygamy and talaq-e-bidat. Saying that these 3 practices are derogatory and discriminatory against which All India Muslim Personal Law Board said that because Muslim Personal Law is not codified it should get the

Speaker 0: protection of Article 25 of the Constitution which means it cannot be judicially reviewed which means you cannot challenge Muslim personal law constitutionally In this case, Supreme Court declared triple talaq unconstitutional because it is not an essential religious practice and also said that if

Speaker 1: you want to declare Nikah, Halala and polygamy unconstitutional then the right authority is with the Parliament Cut to 2023 In March, When a PIL was filed in front of

Speaker 0: the Supreme Court in March to get

Speaker 1: the UCC passed, the court said that the court is a wrong forum to enact the UCC. Only the Parliament can make a law on this. Recently, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that India also needs a uniform civil court and has always promised to implement it in the BJP election manifesto. With this, India's 22nd Law Commission has asked for views and ideas from public and religious organizations on UCC. Those who are interested can share their views by 14th July.

But the previous 21st Law Commission examined UCC in 2018 and asked for views from stakeholders. Then in the report, the Law Commission called the UCC neither necessary nor desirable at this stage. This first commission highlighted many practical difficulties. For example, in Hindu Law, where marriage is considered

Speaker 0: as a holy sacrament, in Christian Law, divorce is still stigmatized.

Speaker 1: In Muslim Law, marriage is a contract And in Parsi laws registration of marriage is a very important ritual It is very important to respect all these attitudes and 1 religion cannot be imposed on another and if there is no consensus on UCC then the only

Speaker 0: way to move forward is to

Speaker 1: make changes in personal laws so that diversity is preserved and at the same time ensure that personal laws do not contradict fundamental rights It is also suggested that instead of bringing UCC we can remove the existing problems in personal laws and make them gender just Can all these problems be removed without bringing UCC? Without passing any law? In my opinion, yes we need to understand that the state has the power of

Speaker 0: the universe that it can

Speaker 1: solve any social injustice for example when the Hindu code bill was brought the state used all the powers to solve the problems so to modify the Muslim law why is the UCC so special? According to me, national interest comes first. The basic human rights of the citizen are very important. The dignity of the individual is very important. If we don't even think of bringing the UCC in this case, then no desired result can be achieved.

I feel that the state

Speaker 0: should filter all the personal laws according to

Speaker 1: the present day and age. And all those practices that

Speaker 0: are derogatory, discriminatory, against social justice should be declared unconstitutional. Is it

Speaker 1: a little more affirmative and strict? It happens sometimes with me. Let me try 1 more time. According to me, the UCC or the Supreme Court's interference in the purse law does not pose a threat to diversity. It will not end the diversity.

For example, uniformity does not mean that everyone will have to take 7 rounds to get married. Uniformity

Speaker 0: in the sense of marriage can mean that everyone will have to

Speaker 2: register their

Speaker 1: marriage. And we already have a lot of uniform laws like constitution, contract. Does Article 14 mean that everyone thought that

Speaker 0: diversity will be in danger if equality comes into the country? No. Does equal pay for equal work make people feel that diversity

Speaker 1: is in danger? No. So why does it seem so when UCC comes? It is very important to understand that the constitution is supreme and personal law has to be changed according to the constitution. If we sit

Speaker 0: to change the constitution according to every personal law, then no constitution will be left. Plus, it is also very important to understand how a law

Speaker 1: is being introduced. We saw during the time of CAA, Farm Law and ongoing Manipur callings that the more important the

Speaker 0: law is to be made, the more important it is to know how the law is being introduced. So, special attention is needed on this too. The most flawed side of the Uniform Civil Code is that the Uniform Civil Code, UCC, Directive Principle of State Policy,

Speaker 1: is a part of DPSP. Like the normal fundamental rights, you cannot enforce them

Speaker 0: in the court. So, how true is this statement? To understand this, we need to

Speaker 1: understand the difference between fundamental rights and DPSC.

Speaker 0: When the country was independent, we had a lot of limitations. Economic limitations, social, cultural,

Speaker 1: a lot of problems. So at

Speaker 0: that time, all the important rights, we guaranteed and protected them in the fundamental rights. And we felt that as the country develops and progresses, we will adopt new rights. So we wrote those rights in DPSC. The biggest example of this is the right to education. So for the longest time, legislators and commissions felt that the country has not developed enough to provide free and compulsory education.

Then they understood that the

Speaker 1: country will not progress until education

Speaker 0: is made compulsory. And as soon as this was realized, an amendment was made and

Speaker 1: the right to education was incorporated into the fundamental right. So,

Speaker 0: as the country progresses, new rights are adopted. So what do you think, can the Uniform Civil Code be

Speaker 1: made a fundamental right? Let's see some pros and cons generally discussed on the Uniform Civil Code. So The biggest con is the mass perception that UCC is against religious freedom It is a sensitive task and it is very important to introduce this law and how it will be implemented is also important Because of diversity, practical difficulties can arise in execution and without state's help, it can be difficult to implement these laws fully. The Indian states are quite divided regarding UCC. These are the states that support UCC and these are the states that oppose it If we talk about the pros then it will provide gender equality provide equal status to all citizens promote national integration and in existing personal laws it will give scope to bring reforms and transformation So this was today's video on Uniform Civil Code I hope you learnt something new

Speaker 0: from this video If yes, then do

Speaker 1: share this video with your friends and family But whatever is said in this video, don't just stop there talk to people, discuss conflicting questions but in a civilized way because we are a part of a civilized nation. So let's behave like 1. It took a lot

Speaker 0: of hard work to make this video. So if you like this video, subscribe to the channel. We upload a lot of videos on similar topics on this channel We also have an Instagram channel

Speaker 1: We do polls on similar topics We ask interesting questions and

Speaker 0: discuss FAQs You can subscribe to that as well That's it for now, see you in the next class, bye bye Bye-bye!

See all Priya Jain transcripts on Youtube

One Nation, One Law | Uniform Civil Code 2023