“Uttarakhand’s UCC: The Live-in Relationship Paradigm Shift”
With the recent ratification of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) Bill in Uttarakhand, the legal landscape governing personal matters undergoes a significant transformation. The UCC aims to standardize laws pertaining to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and more across diverse communities. One significant change in the current Bill is with respect to Live-in relationships. While aimed at formalizing these unions and ensuring legal recognition and protection for partners, the Bill also raises important questions regarding individual rights, privacy, and potential misuse of provisions.
The UCC Bill mandates the compulsory registration of all live-in relationships, regardless of whether the partners are residents of Uttarakhand or not. As per Section 378 of the said Bill, couples must submit a statement to the state registrar within one month of entering into a live-in relationship. Failure to register within the stipulated time may result in imprisonment for up to three months or a fine of Rs. 10,000, or both as per Section 387.
Under Section 381 of the said Bill, the registrar, upon submission of the statement, shall conduct a summary inquiry to verify various aspects, such as existing marriages of the partners, age of partners, whether they come under prohibited degree of relationship or not and whether their consent is free or not. As per Sub-clause 3 of Section 381, the registrar may also summon the partners or other individuals for verification and request additional information or evidence. Registration may be refused if the registrar finds grounds for rejection, with reasons provided in writing to the partners.
Special provisions apply if either partner is below 21 years of age, including intimation to parents/guardians and local authorities.
As per Section 376 of the Bill, child of a live-in relationship shall be legitimate. Also, the Bill, under Section 388, provides provision for maintenance in case of desertion by either partner.
The UCC Bill exempts members of Scheduled Tribes from its provisions, recognizing their distinct cultural practices and traditions.
Some critics argue that mandatory registration may infringe on individual privacy rights and deter couples from opting for live-in arrangements. Concerns have been raised regarding the potential misuse of provisions, especially regarding intimation to parents and penalties for non-registration.
Suggestions for revising certain aspects of the Bill, such as lowering the age threshold for parental intimation, increasing the mandatory time-limit for registration and reconsidering criminalization of non-registration, have been put forward. It is essential to address these concerns through dialogue and possible revisions to uphold both legal clarity and individual liberties
By
Shivani
3 Year LLB, National Law University Odisha