Context: 

This editorial is based on the news “Changing the growth paradigm” which was published in the Hindu. The Uttarakhand Assembly passed the Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code Bill 2024, which purportedly consolidates a common law on marriage and property inheritance. 

• The Bill only awaits the President’s assent to become enforceable law. 

Ambit of Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code Bill 2024

• Mandatory requirement of registration of a live-in relationship.
  • Requires live-in partners to submit a ‘statement’ to the Registrar concerned. 
• Powers of Registrar: Registrar has the powers to examine the statement and conduct an inquiry into the relationship. 
  • He/She is empowered to examine the consent of parties, marital status, and the age of partners. 
  • Moreover, partners can be required to make a personal appearance and the Registrar can also refuse to register the relationship. 
• Termination of the relationship: requires notice to be submitted. 
  • criminal penalty of imprisonment or fine (or both) if this statement is not filed. 
• Criminal Implications: 
  • The couple will be penalised for the submission of false information. 
  • The Registrar will inform the details of the live-in relations to the police station whose jurisdiction governs the couple.

Criticisms of Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code Bill

• Ignores the foundational reason for a live-in relationship: The live-in relationships provide autonomy in their consensual partnerships, which a regulated marriage does not. 
• Moral Policing of young couples: imposes a chilling effect on live-in partners and implicitly discourages such relationships. 
• Involvement of the police is a concern: couples will be wary of entering into genuine relationships since a lack of compliance invites civil and criminal consequences.
• Infringes on the rights provided under Article 21: It infringes on free decision making and an expression of feelings, protected under Article 21, which lays stress on the right to a dignified life.
  • Individuals are constrained by the provisions of the Bill while entering into live-in relationships, which impedes the ability to make the deepest personal choices.
• Unprincipled criminalisation: Translating moral prejudices into criminal legislation leads to what is called ‘unprincipled criminalization’.

• • A democratic liberal state must have a clear policy on what it chooses to criminalise and what it does not. 
• The danger of greater discrimination: The vulnerable couples such as Inter-caste and inter-religious couples are at an increased risk.
• Violation of the Constitutional rights: With the state intrusion in the private affairs of its citizens, there is a violation of the constitutional rights granting autonomy, privacy and equality.

Conclusion

As per the writer, The State neglects to treat consenting adults as capable decision-making partners and it has successfully managed to usurp the most basic of human freedoms: the freedom to love.