Clat Post Febuary

Till nuclear amendments pg -l7

Uttarakhand – first state to implement UCC

January 27, 2025 – Uttarakhand became the first Indian state to implement a full‑fledged Uniform Civil Code.

Effective date of Uttarakhand UCC

January 27, 2025.

Scope of Uttarakhand UCC

Harmonizes personal laws on marriage, divorce, inheritance, and property rights for all citizens in the state.

Exemption in Uttarakhand UCC

Scheduled Tribes are exempt from the state’s UCC provisions.

Definition of Uniform Civil Code

A common set of personal laws for all citizens, regardless of religion, covering marriage, divorce, inheritance, property, and adoption.

Uniformity in personal laws

Harmonization means replacing multiple religious codes with one secular code.

Personal laws covered under UCC

Includes rules on marriage solemnization, divorce grounds, maintenance, inheritance succession, and property rights.

Gender‑equality provision

Guarantees equal inheritance, property, and maintenance rights for men and women.

Ban on polygamy

Polygamy (more than one spouse) is prohibited under Uttarakhand’s UCC.

Ban on instant triple talaq

Instant triple talaq (talaq‑e‑biddat) is outlawed.

Ban on halala and iddat

Halala (forced remarriage) and iddat waiting‑period abuses are banned.

Minimum legal marriage age for men

21 years.

Minimum legal marriage age for women

18 years.

Marriage registration – existing marriages

Must register marriages since 2010 within six months of UCC enforcement.

Marriage registration – new marriages

New ceremonies must be registered within 60 days of the wedding.

Live‑in relationship registration deadline

Must register within one month of UCC enforcement.

Minimum age for live‑in relationships

21 years; those under 21 require parental consent.

Rights of registered live‑in couples

Registered couples gain housing rights, maintenance claims, and legal recognition equivalent to married couples.

Inheritance rights – sons vs daughters

Sons and daughters receive equal shares in ancestral and self‑acquired property.

Legitimacy of children from live‑ins

Children born to registered live‑in couples are treated as legitimate heirs.

Mandatory registration of divorces

Divorces must be registered on the UCC portal within prescribed timelines.

Aadhaar‑based verification for UCC

The UCC online portal uses Aadhaar authentication to prevent fraud.

Inter‑linking with government departments

UCC portal integrates with 13 departments including police, courts, and revenue.

Portal‑facilitated will registration

Users can register wills by uploading documents or a brief video on the portal.

Emergency “Tatkal” registration

A rush registration facility (“Tatkal”) is available for urgent cases at a nominal fee.

Tatkal fee structure

A small, state‑determined charge allows expedited processing.

Uniform Civil Code – political promise

Fulfills the BJP’s 2022 Uttarakhand Assembly election manifesto pledge.

Supporters’ view on UCC

Viewed as a progressive step toward women’s rights and social justice.

Critics’ view on UCC

Concerns over erosion of religious freedom and cultural autonomy.

Article 44 – UCC in Constitution

Directive Principle: “The State shall endeavor to secure for citizens a Uniform Civil Code.”

Nature of Article 44

A non‑justiciable directive principle guiding policy but not enforceable by courts.

Shah Bano case (1985)

The Supreme Court awarded maintenance to a divorced Muslim woman under CrPC, intensifying UCC debate.

Significance of Shah Bano

Upholding gender‑equal maintenance rights over contradictory religious personal law.

Sabhajit Singh Committee (1986)

Concluded that immediate national UCC was impractical due to India’s diversity.

21st Law Commission report (2018)

Recommended phased UCC implementation with public consultation and awareness campaigns.

Ranjana Desai Committee (2022)

State committee led by Justice R.P. Desai that drafted Uttarakhand’s UCC bill after extensive consultations.

Triple Talaq judgment (Shayara Bano, 2017)

The Supreme Court struck down instant triple talaq as unconstitutional, strengthening calls for UCC.

Impact of Shayara Bano

Judgment spurred advocacy for a Uniform Civil Code to eliminate discriminatory religious divorce practices.

Historical UCC debate

First discussed in Constituent Assembly debates of the 1940s.

Constituent Assembly view

Framers intended a UCC for unity but deferred its enactment due to cultural diversity concerns.

Need for UCC – social justice

Aims to promote equality, eliminate gender bias, and simplify legal processes.

Need for UCC – national integration

A uniform code ensures legal consistency across all states.

Goa’s Portuguese Civil Code (1961)

Legacy code still governs personal laws in Goa, often cited as a de facto UCC.

Comparison – Uttarakhand vs Goa

Goa’s code is a holdover from colonial times; Uttarakhand’s UCC is a newly enacted secular law.

Role of public awareness in UCC

Law Commission advised extensive education campaigns to build public support.

Phased implementation – rationale

Gradual rollout allows adaptation, feedback, and conflict resolution.

Challenges in UCC rollout

Potential resistance from religious groups, logistical hurdles, and legal disputes.

Monitoring UCC impact

The state will track registration metrics and dispute resolution outcomes.

Future review of Uttarakhand UCC

The law will be reviewed after a pilot phase for necessary refinements.

UCC as model for other states

Uttarakhand’s experience may guide national or other state‑level UCC adoption.

Rome Statute – international perspective

ICC’s Rome Statute contains universal principles on human rights, illustrating uniform legal norms beyond personal laws.

ICC principles vs UCC

The Rome Statute enforces universal criminal laws, unlike UCC’s focus on personal status laws.

Personal laws in Iran & Saudi Arabia

Islamic countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia base personal laws strictly on religious doctrine.

Uniform codes in France

France enforces a secular civil code (Napoleonic Code) applying uniformly to all citizens.

Uniform codes in Turkey

Turkey adopted a secular civil code in the 1920s to replace religious laws.

Constituent Assembly timeline

UCC concept debated from 1947 to 1950 during the framing of the Constitution.

Article 44 exact text

“The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India.”

Directive Principle vs fundamental right

Directive Principles guide state policy, whereas Fundamental Rights are enforceable in court.

Law Commission chair (2018)

Report was headed by Dr. Justice B. S. Chauhan, emphasizing stakeholder consultative process.

Ranjana Desai Committee mandate

Formed in 2022 by Uttarakhand government, led by Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai, to draft the state’s UCC.

Announcement of nuclear liability law amendments

The Indian government announced amendments to the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act 2010 and the Atomic Energy Act 1962 in early 2025 to attract foreign investment and revive stalled nuclear projects.

Purpose of the proposed amendments

The changes aim to align India’s liability framework with international norms (CSC), reduce supplier risk, and facilitate new nuclear investments from EDF and Westinghouse.

Key projects targeted for revival

Jaitapur Nuclear Project (six EPR‑1650 reactors by EDF) and Kovvada Nuclear Project (six AP1000 reactors by Westinghouse).

SMR investment allocation

The 2025 budget earmarked ₹20,000 crore for five Small Modular Reactors to be operational by 2033.

Atomic Energy Act 1962 – main objective

Legislates development, control, and peaceful use of atomic energy; vests exclusive control with the central government.

Atomic Energy Act – safety & regulation

Establishes guidelines for radiation safety, prevention of hazards, radioactive waste management, and empowers AERB oversight.

Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB)

Established in 1983 under the Atomic Energy Act to ensure nuclear safety and radiation protection across all facilities.

Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act 2010 – purpose

Creates a compensation framework for nuclear accidents, holding plant operators liable and defining claim procedures.

CLNDA – strict supplier liability

The Act uniquely imposes strict liability on equipment suppliers for damage caused by defects, deterring global vendors.

Historical drivers for CLNDA

Influenced by the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy and 2011 Fukushima disaster to ensure robust compensation mechanisms.

Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC)

The international regime holding primarily operators liable; India ratified CSC in 2016 and seeks consistency with its liability law.

Supplier liability vs CSC model

India’s CLNDA contrasts with CSC norms by extending liability to suppliers, which has discouraged EDF and Westinghouse participation.

India’s existing nuclear capacity

22 operating reactors generating 6,780 MW, with only Russia’s Rosatom as the foreign operator.

Budgetary boost for nuclear energy

₹20,000 crore allocation in FY 25–26 to expand capacity and support new reactor construction.

National nuclear target by 2047

India aims to achieve 100 GW of installed nuclear power capacity by its centenary of independence.

U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Deal 2008

A landmark agreement granting India access to U.S. nuclear technology despite non‑NPT status; implementation slowed by liability issues.

EDF’s Jaitapur delays

EDF’s Jaitapur EPR project, signed in 2009, stalled for over a decade due to regulatory hurdles and supplier liability concerns.

Homi Bhabha – AEC founder

Dr. Homi Bhabha established India’s Atomic Energy Commission in 1948, laying the groundwork for the nation’s nuclear program.

Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) formation

In 1954, the DAE was created under PM Nehru to coordinate atomic energy research, development, and applications.

Smiling Buddha (Pokhran I, 1974)

India’s first peaceful nuclear explosion on May 18, 1974, marking entry into the nuclear‑armed club.

Operation Shakti (Pokhran II, 1998)

Five nuclear tests carried out in May 1998 under PM Vajpayee, officially declaring India a nuclear weapons state.

NITI Aayog’s Fiscal Health Index 2025

NITI Aayog launched India’s first comprehensive Fiscal Health Index (FHI) on January 24, 2025, to assess and compare the fiscal performance of 18 Indian states.

Objective of FHI 2025

To evaluate state governments on their fiscal discipline, revenue generation, capital expenditure, and debt sustainability, promoting sound fiscal management.

Top 3 states in FHI 2025

1. Odisha (67.8), 2. Chhattisgarh (55.2), 3. Goa (53.6) – leading in debt management, revenue mobilization, and expenditure quality.

Bottom 3 states in FHI 2025

16. Punjab, 17. Kerala, 18. West Bengal – struggled with high debt, low capital spending, and fiscal deficits.

Number of states assessed in FHI 2025

FHI 2025 covers 18 Indian states across 5 key parameters using 33 fiscal indicators.

Time frame of data used

The report is based on data from FY 2018–19 to 2022–23, measuring trends and sustainability.

Five core pillars of FHI

1) Fiscal Prudence, 2) Quality of Expenditure, 3) Revenue Mobilization, 4) Debt Management Index, 5) Debt Sustainability Index.

Fiscal Prudence (pillar 1)

Measures states’ ability to maintain fiscal deficit and revenue deficit within limits; Odisha and Maharashtra scored high.

Quality of Expenditure (pillar 2)

Assesses ratio of capital to revenue expenditure and share of spending on social and economic services.

Revenue Mobilization (pillar 3)

Tracks own tax and non-tax revenue as a percentage of GSDP; Karnataka, Chhattisgarh scored high.

Debt Index (pillar 4)

Measures composition of state debt, ratio of interest payments to revenue receipts, and GSDP-debt ratio.

Debt Sustainability (pillar 5)

Assesses a state’s ability to sustain debt over time using fiscal deficit and debt-GSDP trends.

Odisha – top performer

Scored highest (67.8); led in fiscal prudence, debt management, and overall balance between growth and sustainability.

Chhattisgarh – 2nd best

Scored 55.2; known for strong revenue collection and low fiscal deficit; top performer in Revenue Mobilization pillar.

Goa – 3rd place

Score: 53.6; performed well in Quality of Expenditure, particularly in education and capital spending.

Maharashtra – best in Fiscal Prudence

Maintained low revenue deficit and strong control over fiscal spending.

Karnataka – high revenue mobilization

Showed strong own-tax to GSDP ratio; focus on GST and state excise efficiency.

Kerala – among bottom 3

Ranked 17th; high welfare spending led to persistent fiscal deficits and unsustainable debt ratio.

Punjab – near the bottom

Ranked 16th; affected by low revenue generation and high committed liabilities like salaries and pensions.