Uniform Civil Code

For example, the following is an excerpt from an article
by Mr. Balraj Puri. Totally rejecting the concept of the
common civil code, he writes:
My objection to the concept of national unity and the
arguments advanced in support of it by the honourable
judges is more fundamental. In my view, they adversely
affect the process of nation building, the pluralist
character of the Indian nation and dialogue within the
Muslim Community and between it and the other
communities, mainly Hindus, on the subject of
reforming its personal law. By premising that Muslim
Personal Law cannot be reformed without making it a
part of a uniform law, the judges have subordinated the
cause of Muslim women to the Muslim urge for identity
and have thus done grave injustice to a good cause.
There is absolutely no logical connection between
uniformity and reform. The case against the former is as
unassailable as it is for the latter. Nor is uniform law
imperative, as the judges argue, for the promotion of
national unity and solidarity. There are 66 entries in the
State List and 47 in the Concurrent List of the
Constitution on which States are empowered to make
laws without any obligation to conform to uniformity. If
diversity of laws, based on geographical arid cultural
diversities of the States, has pot threatened the unity of
the country, would be threatened only if the diversities
are of non-territorial form as are religious communities?
Justice Kuldip Singh has proclaimed that no community
UNIFORM CIVIL CODE—A CRITICAL STUDY 27