Articles on 12 August 2025

Article 44 of Indian Constitution discusses the creation of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) to regulate personal matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption for all citizens, regardless of their faith. Positioned under the Directive Principles of State Policy, it acts as a constitutional guideline for the government rather than a law enforceable in courts. The primary objective of the Uniform Civil Court is to strengthen national unity, uphold secular values, and ensure gender equality through a single, consistent set of civil laws.

Article 44 of Indian Constitution

The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.

Article 44 of Indian Constitution Interpretation

Article 44 of Indian Constitution was added for the adoption of  a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) which is applicable to all citizens who aim to bring consistency to the personal laws across the country. The major purpose is to bring coordination between the legal provisions related to marriage, divorce, inheritance and adoption which ensures the uniformity in the cultural and religious diversity of India. Article 44 of Indian Constitution directs the state to work towards creating a Uniform Civil Code, or UCC. If implemented, it would replace the separate personal laws that different communities follow, often based on their own religious texts and traditions with a single, shared framework. 

Article 44 of Indian Constitution represents a constitutional goal of ensuring that all citizens are subject to the same set of personal laws, irrespective of faith. It aims to remove religion-based legal distinctions, thereby promoting national unity while aligning personal laws with the principles of secularism and gender equality upheld by the Constitution.

Article 44 of Indian Constitution Background

The idea of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) can be traced back to the colonial period, with the first discussions emerging in 1835. That year, a British government report stressed the importance of bringing uniformity to Indian laws on crimes, evidence, and contracts. Yet, it specifically left out the personal laws of Hindus and Muslims, recognising how deeply these were tied to religious traditions.

Over time, as more laws were passed dealing with personal matters, calls for reform began to grow louder. By 1947, the British had set up the B.N. Rau Committee to review and codify Hindu law. This committee, often called the Hindu Law Committee, examined the Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act of 1937 and other related laws. It recommended a structured Hindu code that would give women equal rights, especially in marriage and inheritance. 

Pre-Independence Era

The earliest formal mention of a uniform set of laws came in the Lex Loci Report of 1840. This report recommended that criminal laws, contract law, and the law of evidence be codified and applied uniformly across the country. However, it advised keeping personal laws outside this process, acknowledging the sensitivity of religious customs. Later, the Queen’s Proclamation of 1859 reinforced this approach by assuring that the British administration would not interfere with personal laws.

Post-Independence Era (1947-1985)

When India became independent, the idea of a Uniform Civil Code found strong connections with leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru and B.R. Ambedkar. They saw it as an important step toward national unity and legal equality. But resistance from religious groups was intense, leading to a compromise. Instead of making it an enforceable law, the framers placed it in the Directive Principles of State Policy under Article 44, treating it as a constitutional goal rather than an immediate mandate.

Arguments Supporting the Uniform Civil Code

The proposal for implementing a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is supported by several compelling considerations, each aimed at ensuring legal uniformity, strengthening social cohesion, and promoting justice. These arguments address the complexities that arise from India’s diverse legal and cultural landscape.

• India already applies certain laws uniformly, regardless of religion or region. Examples include the Indian Contract Act of 1872 and the Special Marriage Act of 1954, which handle matters similar to personal laws.
• A common civil code could help bring communities closer together, promoting a stronger sense of belonging to one nation while respecting cultural diversity.
• By removing overlapping or contradictory legal provisions, a uniform code would create a clearer, more coherent legal framework.
• The adoption of a UCC would reinforce the idea of a shared national identity, making it easier to rise above divisions based on religion or tradition.
• Many personal laws still contain provisions that disadvantage women. A uniform code could address these inequalities, ensuring equal rights and protections for everyone.

Article 44 of Indian Constitution Significance

Article 44 of Indian Constitution discusses the establishment of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) to bring consistency to personal laws across the nation. Its importance lies in advancing the principles of equality, justice, and national integration while reinforcing the secular foundation of the Indian state.

• At present, personal laws in India differ across religious communities. Article 44 seeks to bring coordination to these varied systems into a single, coherent legal framework applicable to all citizens.
• By subjecting every individual to the same set of laws in matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption, the UCC aims to uphold fairness and eliminate legal disparities based on religion.
• Standardising personal laws can promote a stronger sense of unity among India’s culturally and religiously diverse population, thereby contributing to social cohesion.
• Article 44 of Indian Constitution also reinforces the secular behaviour of the Indian state by ensuring that the law operates impartially, without granting preferential treatment to any particular religion.

Uniform Civil Code Challenges

The implementation of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) presents significant challenges, largely due to deeply rooted social, cultural, and religious diversity of India. Concerns often centre on the balance between ensuring uniformity in personal laws and respecting the freedoms and sentiments of various communities.

• Framing a single set of laws for a population as culturally and religiously varied as India is a complex and sensitive undertaking.
• Critics fear that the UCC might violate the constitutionally guaranteed right to practise and preserve one’s religion.
• Efforts to codify personal laws could provoke social tensions or even trigger unrest in communities particularly in regions where religious identity plays a central role in daily life.
• The requirement for the State to intervene in personal matters is often met with resistance, especially from communities that view such reforms as an encroachment on their traditions.

Article 44 of Indian Constitution Case Laws

The judiciary has played a significant role in interpreting Article 44 and examining its implications for personal laws, gender justice, and the broader aim of legal uniformity. Several landmark cases highlight the evolving judicial perspective on the Uniform Civil Code.

Mohammad Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985)

Commonly known as the Shah Bano case, this matter involved a Muslim woman, Shah Bano, who sought maintenance from her husband under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after being divorced through triple talaq. The Supreme Court ruled in her favour, affirming her right to maintenance. However, the decision prompted the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which curtailed the scope of Section 125 for Muslim women.

Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017)

In this case, the Supreme Court declared the practice of triple talaq (talaq-e-bidat) unconstitutional. To implement the ruling, Parliament passed legislation criminalising the pronouncement of instant triple talaq whether verbal, written, or electronic by a Muslim husband.

Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995)

The Court addressed whether a Hindu man married under Hindu law could validly contract a second marriage after converting to Islam. It held that conversion for the purpose of entering into a second marriage constituted misuse of personal laws. Such a marriage, without dissolving the first under the Hindu Marriage Act, amounted to bigamy and was punishable under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code.

Danial Latifi & Anr v. Union of India (2001)

This case examined the constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. The Supreme Court upheld the Act while interpreting it in a manner consistent with the Shah Bano ruling. It held that divorced Muslim women were entitled to reasonable and fair provision for maintenance until they remarried. Where a conflict arose between the Act and Section 125 of the CrPC, the latter would prevail to ensure constitutional compliance.

John Vallamattom v. Union of India (2003)

A Christian priest challenged Section 118 of the Indian Succession Act, which restricted Christians from bequeathing property for religious or charitable purposes through a will. The Supreme Court struck down the provision as unconstitutional, observing that Article 44 directs the State to strive towards a Uniform Civil Code applicable to all citizens.

Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013)

The Court reiterated that the Directive Principles of State Policy, including Article 44, are not enforceable in a court of law. While the judiciary may interpret and promote these principles, they do not create legally enforceable rights.

Article 76 of Indian Constitution defines the role of the Attorney General of India, the country’s highest legal advisor. Appointed by the President, the Attorney General must be qualified to serve as a judge of the Supreme Court. The primary responsibilities include advising the Government of India on legal matters and representing it in court. The Attorney General has the right of audience in all Indian courts and holds office at the pleasure of the President. The President also determines the remuneration for the position.

Article 76 of Indian Constitution

(1) The President shall appoint a person who is qualified to be appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court to be Attorney-General for India.

(2) It shall be the duty of the Attorney-General to give advice to the Government of India upon such legal matters, and to perform such other duties of a legal character, as may from time to time be referred or assigned to him by the President, and to discharge the functions conferred on him by or under this Constitution or any other law for the time being in force.

(3) In the performance of his duties the Attorney-General shall have right of audience in all courts in the territory of India.

(4) The Attorney-General shall hold office during the pleasure of the President, and shall receive such remuneration as the President may determine.

Attorney-General for India

Article 76 of Indian Constitution establishes the office of the Attorney General (AG) of India, the highest legal officer in the country. As the principal legal advisor to the Union Government, the Attorney General provides counsel on all legal matters and represents the government in the Supreme Court and High Courts. This constitutional position holds a vital role in shaping and guiding the Union Government’s legal processes, ensuring that its actions align with the law.

Article 76(1): Appointment of the Attorney General

The President of India appoints the Attorney General. To be eligible, a person must be qualified to serve as a Judge of the Supreme Court. This requires:

• Being a citizen of India
• Having served as a High Court judge for at least 5 years, or
• Having practiced as an advocate in a High Court for at least 10 years, or
• Being recognised by the President as an eminent jurist

Article 76(2): Duties of the Attorney General

The Attorney General advises the Government of India on legal matters and performs other duties assigned by the President. The role involves assisting in the interpretation of laws, shaping legal policy, and ensuring the Union Government’s actions align with the Constitution.

Article 76(3) & 76(4): Right of Audience and Tenure

Under Article 76(3), the Attorney General has the right to participate in court proceedings and speak in any court across the country. As per Article 76(4), the Attorney General holds office at the pleasure of the President, and their remuneration is also determined by the President.

Lists of Rights of Attorney General

Article 76 of the Indian Constitution, under Part V, grants the Attorney General specific rights and privileges to perform their duties effectively:

• Right of Audience - The Attorney General can appear and be heard in any court in India, including the Supreme Court and subordinate courts, on behalf of the Government of India.
• Participation in Parliament - They may attend and take part in the proceedings of both Houses of Parliament, including joint sessions and committee meetings (if nominated), but cannot vote.
• Parliamentary Privileges - The Attorney General enjoys the same privileges and immunities as Members of Parliament, as provided under Articles 105 and 194 of the Constitution.

Limitation on Functions of Attorney General

Article 76 of Indian Constitution also sets specific Limitation on Functions of Attorney General to avoid conflicts of interest and safeguard the integrity of the office. These limitations are meant to ensure that the Attorney General’s actions remain consistent with the Government of India’s interests:

• They may take part in the proceedings of both Houses of Parliament but do not have the right to vote.
• They must refrain from making statements contrary to the position of the Government of India.
• They cannot provide legal advice to any party engaged in litigation against the government.
• Accepting a directorship in a private company requires prior approval from the government.
• They are barred from defending individuals accused in criminal cases without the government’s consent.

Article 76 of Indian Constitution Significance

Under Article 76 of Indian Constitution, the Attorney General’s role extends far beyond offering legal opinions. The position actively supports the functioning of the government in several ways:

• Ensures that government actions comply with the Constitution, safeguards fundamental rights, and provides clarity on complex legal questions.
• Acts as a bridge between the two branches, promoting coordination and effective communication.
• Guides the government in framing and interpreting policies so they meet legal requirements.
• Represents India in critical cases before domestic and international courts, especially in matters of national importance.

The Constitution of India was adopted on 26 November 1949, providing a detailed framework for governing the country. It defines the structure and functioning of governments at various levels. Article 113 of Indian Constitution deals with the procedure in Parliament regarding estimates, setting out the rules and guidelines for the budgeting process and the allocation of government funds.

Article 113 of Indian Constitution

• So much of the estimates as relates to expenditure charged upon the Consolidated Fund of India shall not be submitted to the vote of Parliament, but nothing in this clause shall be construed as preventing the discussion in either House of Parliament of any of those estimates.
• So much of the said estimates as relates to other expenditure shall be submitted in the form of demands for grants to the House of the People, and the House of the People shall have power to assent, or to refuse to assent, to any demand, or to assent to any demand subject to a reduction of the amount specified therein.
• No demand for a grant shall be made except on the recommendation of the President.

Article 113 of Indian Constitution Interpretation

Under Article 113 of the Indian Constitution, the President presents the annual financial statement to both Houses of Parliament. This statement contains the government’s estimated income and expenditure for the upcoming financial year.

The budget divides expenditure into two categories:

• Expenditure charged to the Consolidated Fund of India - Not subject to a vote in Parliament, though it can be discussed.
• Expenditure requiring parliamentary approval - These are presented as demands for grants in the Lok Sabha.

The provision also differentiates between revenue expenditure and other types of expenditure. While charged expenditures are only debated, demands for grants can be approved, rejected, or reduced by the Lok Sabha. Every demand for a grant must carry the President’s recommendation. This process ensures that the executive plays a key role in managing budgetary proposals.

The Constitution of India, which came into force on 26 January 1950, lays down a detailed framework for governance, defining the powers and functions of each organ of the State and the rights and duties of citizens. Within this framework, Article 118 of Indian Constitution deals specifically with the rules of procedure for the Houses of Parliament.

By granting each House autonomy to decide its own working methods while allowing for joint procedures where necessary, Article 118 of Indian Constitution ensures flexibility, parliamentary independence, and smooth legislative functioning within the constitutional framework of India.

Article 118 of Indian Constitution

• Each House of Parliament may make rules for regulating, subject to the provisions of this Constitution, its procedure and the conduct of its business.
• Until rules are made under clause (1), the rules of procedure and standing orders in force immediately before the commencement of this Constitution with respect to the Legislature of the Dominion of India shall have effect in relation to Parliament subject to such modifications and adaptations as may be made therein by the Chairman of the Council of States or the Speaker of the House of the People, as the case may be.
• The President, after consultation with the Chairman of the Council of States and the Speaker of the House of the People, may make rules as to the procedure with respect to joint sittings of, and communications between, the two Houses.
• At a joint sitting of the two Houses the Speaker of the House of the People, or in his absence such a person as may be determined by rules of procedure made under clause (3), shall preside.

Article 118 of Indian Constitution Interpretation

Article 118 of Indian Constitution gives both the Lok Sabha (House of the People) and the Rajya Sabha (Council of States) the authority to frame their own rules for regulating procedures and conducting sessions. This ensures that each House has autonomy in deciding how its legislative work is carried out.

Until such rules are formally adopted, the procedures and business conduct that were in force before the Constitution came into effect on 26 January 1950 continue to apply, provided they are consistent with the new constitutional framework.

The Article 118 also empowers the President of India, in consultation with the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha or the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, to frame procedural rules when a House has not yet established its own.

Each House maintains a Committee on Rules, responsible for reviewing existing rules, considering amendments, and recommending changes to ensure that parliamentary functioning remains efficient and in line with evolving legislative needs.

Through these provisions, Article 118 of Indian Constitution safeguards both flexibility and order in parliamentary proceedings, balancing tradition with the ability to adapt.

Article 353 of Indian Constitution is part of the emergency provisions under Part XVIII and becomes applicable when a Proclamation of Emergency is issued under Article 352. It empowers the Union government to assume greater control over both central and state functions during such periods. Parliament is authorised to make laws on subjects beyond the Union List, and the executive gains the power to issue directions to state governments on matters ordinarily within their exclusive jurisdiction.

Article 353 of Indian Constitution

While a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, then–

1.  notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of directions to any State as to the manner in which the executive power thereof is to be exercised;
2. the power of Parliament to make laws with respect to any matter shall include power to make laws conferring powers and imposing duties, or authorising the conferring of powers and the imposition of duties, upon the Union or officers and authorities of the Union as respects that matter, notwithstanding that it is one which is not enumerated in the Union List:

Provided that where a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation only in any part of the territory of India,

1. the executive power of the Union to give directions under clause (a), and
2. the power of Parliament to make laws under clause (b),

shall also extend to any State other than a State in which or in any part of which the Proclamation of Emergency is in operation if and in so far as the security of India or any part of the territory thereof is threatened by activities in or in relation to the part of the territory of India in which the Proclamation of Emergency is in operation.

Article 353 of Indian Constitution Interpretation

Article 353 of Indian Constitution outlines what changes when a National Emergency is in force. It shifts more authority to the Union government so that responses to threats can be coordinated at the national level.

• Greater Executive Power for the Centre: The Union can issue binding directions to State governments on how to run their administrations during the emergency.
• Expanded Lawmaking Powers: Parliament can legislate on subjects beyond the Union List, even those normally under State control.
• Safeguarding States: The Union takes responsibility for protecting States from external aggression or internal disturbances, ensuring they continue to operate under the Constitution.
• Wider Application: Even if the emergency is declared in a specific area, its provisions can extend to other parts of the country if national security demands it.

Article 353 of Indian Constitution Landmark Judgements

Despite its significance, Article 353 of the Constitution of India has not been central to any landmark Supreme Court ruling. However, cases like Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) and ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) have addressed the broader framework of emergency powers, particularly those under Articles 352 and 356.

It’s worth noting that “Article 353A” and “Article 353B,” though sometimes mentioned in academic discussions or textbooks, do not actually exist in the Constitution and have never been part of any judicial proceedings.

Article 353 of Indian Constitution Significance

Article 353 of Indian Constitution plays a key role in safeguarding the nation’s unity and security during emergencies. It temporarily shifts the federal framework of India toward a more unitary system, giving the Centre the authority to act quickly in the face of threats like war or armed rebellion.

This shift matters because when states cannot manage extreme situations on their own, Article 353 of Indian Constitution allows the Union to take charge with clear direction and nationwide coordination. During such times, Parliament can legislate on matters normally reserved for states and assign responsibilities to central authorities.

One notable feature is that emergency measures can apply beyond the directly affected area if the situation threatens national security elsewhere. This helps contain risks before they spread.

While this temporary concentration of power does alter the federal balance, its aim is strictly to protect public safety. Article 353 demonstrates the Constitution’s flexibility in adapting to crises, making it a potent legal mechanism for defending India’s national interests.

Article 353 of Indian Constitution Amendments

Though Article 353 of Indian Constitution has never been amended directly, its scope in practice has changed over time.

The 42nd Constitutional Amendment (1976) expanded the Centre’s authority during a National Emergency, making it explicit that Parliament could legislate on any subject, including those in the State List.

Two years later, the 44th Amendment (1978) built in safeguards to prevent abuse. A proclamation of emergency now requires:

• Written approval from the Union Cabinet
• Parliamentary approval every six months
• Greater transparency and accountability measures

These reforms didn’t alter the text of Article 353, but they reshaped how and when it can be invoked, reflecting India’s attempt to balance decisive central action with democratic checks.

References in some writings to “Article 353A” or “Article 353B” are not constitutionally valid. They are usually informal labels or misreadings of Article 353’s clauses, and have no standing in law.

Though Article 111 of Indian Constitution has never been amended directly, its practical application has shaped parliamentary procedure over time. It defines how a Bill, once passed by both Houses of Parliament, is sent to the President for assent. The President may  Approve it, Withhold assent, or Return it (if it is not a Money Bill) for reconsideration.

This mechanism ensures an additional constitutional check before a Bill becomes law. While the Article 111 of Indian Constitution has remained unchanged, debates around the President’s discretion and timelines for action have influenced its interpretation.

Article 111 of Indian Constitution

When a Bill has been passed by the Houses of Parliament, it shall be presented to the President, and the President shall declare either that he assents to the Bill, or that he withholds assent therefrom:

Provided that the President may, as soon as possible after the presentation to him of a Bill for assent, return the Bill if it is not a Money Bill to the Houses with a message requesting that they will reconsider the Bill or any specified provisions thereof and, in particular, will consider the desirability of introducing any such amendments as he may recommend in his message, and when a Bill is so returned, the Houses

shall reconsider the Bill accordingly, and if the Bill is passed again by the Houses with or without amendment and presented to the President for assent, the President shall not withhold assent therefrom.

Article 111 of Indian Constitution Interpretation

Article 111 of the Indian Constitution lays down the process for the President’s assent to Bills. Once a Bill has been passed by both the houses of the Parliament, it is sent to the Presidents who can either approve it thereby making it a law or withhold the assent. Except in the cases of Money Bills, the President may also return a Bill to Parliament with recommendations for reconsideration. If both Houses pass the bill again with or without changes, the President is then obliged to give assent.

Some commentaries mention “pocket veto” or “constructive assent” in relation to Article 111. These are not formal constitutional terms but describe situations arising from the President’s use of powers under this provision.