DEHRADUN: Months after implementing the landmark Uniform Civil Code (UCC), the Uttarakhand government has moved to refine its rules, filing an affidavit in the High Court that signals a softening of certain provisions related to live-in relationship registration.
The 78-page affidavit, presented by Advocate General S.N. Babulkar, outlines proposed amendments aimed at making the registration process more flexible and clarifying data-sharing protocols with law enforcement.
A key relief for applicants concerns the appeal process. Currently, if a Registrar rejects a statement concerning a live-in relationship, the timeline to challenge this decision is tight. The government now proposes extending the window for applicants to file an appeal from 30 days to 45 days from the date of receiving the rejection order.
While the appeal window is expanding, the grounds for outright rejection based on customs and traditions have been significantly tightened. The original rule allowed a Registrar to deny registration if local customs did not permit the union between the individuals. The proposed amendment ties this power directly to a violation of the UCC itself. The Registrar can now only refuse registration if the custom or tradition directly contravenes Section 380 of the UCC.
Section 380 explicitly lists conditions rendering registration void, such as if the partners are in a 'prohibited degree of relationship', if either is already married, or if a minor is involved.
Perhaps the most significant change addresses privacy concerns regarding police notification. The government is seeking to limit the scope of information sharing between the Registrar and local police.
"The sharing of information will be strictly for record-keeping purposes only," the affidavit states, applying this limitation to both the initial registration and the subsequent notification of relationship termination. This replaces the original provision, where the Registrar was mandated to share termination details directly with the Officer in Charge of the local police station upon receipt.
Furthermore, the state has proposed that the local police station officer and the Superintendent of Police will now share the specific responsibility of ensuring the confidentiality of the information provided by live-in applicants.
In a move to accommodate more applicants, the amendments also propose flexibility regarding identity proof. Changes are being introduced to allow alternative identification documents where the Aadhaar number was previously mandatory, particularly for individuals who are not the primary applicant.
BJP state spokesperson Honey Pathak welcomed the development, stating, "The proposed changes demonstrate the government's efforts to strike a balance between the UCC's transparency objectives and ensuring procedural fairness and privacy protections for couples in live-in relationships."
