The presumption of innocence is a fundamental right in Indian criminal law. How are the preventive detention laws justified under the same as an exception? Are similar laws like UAPA and PMLA the exception or the new norm? Justify your ...
"It is a regret that Article 44 has remained a dead letter" said Justice Y V Chandrachud in Shah Bano judgement (1985). Our constitution-makers have placed 'Uniform Civil Code(Article 44)' under Directive principles of State Policy(Part IV). Need for UCC to balance diversity and ensure social justiRead more
“It is a regret that Article 44 has remained a dead letter” said Justice Y V Chandrachud in Shah Bano judgement (1985). Our constitution-makers have placed ‘Uniform Civil Code(Article 44)’ under Directive principles of State Policy(Part IV).
Need for UCC to balance diversity and ensure social justice
1) It enhances ‘Secularism’ – mentioned in Preamble and a part of Basic structure.
2) It is based on ‘Equality’ – a fundamental right (Article 14)
3) Personal laws are usually against women and marginal, vulnerable sections.
For example, Shariat – allows polygamy (Sarala Mudgal Case)
5) States like Goa, Uttarkhand have adopted UCC after legislative consensus
6) Supreme Court has supported its implementation in multiple instances.
Challenges to implement UCC
1. Article 26 provides for the right to manage one’s own religious matters.
2. Debate of – Fundamental Rights(Article 26) v/s DPSPs(Article 44)
3. STs have customary laws protected by the constitution itself.
4. Apprehensions of imposition of majoritarian values on minority
5. Accommodating diversity
Way forward
1) 22nd Law commission sought public consultation process on UCC
2) Consensus building that UCC is necessary
3) In the short-term personal laws can be codified phase-wise
4) UCC should not be imposed right away through an ordinance, it should pass through parliamentary debates and deliberations
5) Political parties should rise above differences for the common good of all
A fundamental change in people’s mindset is required for UCC’s implementation.
See less
The presumption of innocence is a fundamental right in Indian criminal law, enshrined in Article 20(3) of the Constitution. However, as an exception, preventive detention laws like the National Security Act (NSA) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) allow for detention without trial,Read more
The presumption of innocence is a fundamental right in Indian criminal law, enshrined in Article 20(3) of the Constitution. However, as an exception, preventive detention laws like the National Security Act (NSA) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) allow for detention without trial, effectively reversing the burden of proof.
These laws are justified on the grounds of national security and public order, as they aim to prevent individuals from engaging in activities that may threaten the state. The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of preventive detention laws, provided they adhere to the procedural safeguards laid down in Article 22 of the Constitution.Laws like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) have also been criticized for shifting the burden of proof onto the accused. While the government argues that these laws are necessary to combat serious crimes, civil liberties advocates contend that they undermine the presumption of innocence and due process.
The increasing use of such laws raises concerns about the erosion of fundamental rights and the creation of a new norm where the exception becomes the rule. It is crucial to strike a balance between national security and individual rights, ensuring that preventive detention laws are used judiciously and in accordance with constitutional principles.
See less