Can there be another division of India on religious lines?

I have stated that Nehru wanted a Uniform Civil Code but could not do so because of opposition. He did it for Hindus. Instead of praising him for this courageous step you enjoy condemning him. You should condemn the PMs who followed him till date for lacking courage. Nehru's action was not final. It can be done today also. Let it be done muslims or no muslims.Have guts do it.

Where is the courageous step in giving something that would have made this nation much more secure simply to please the then 8% of the population? It shows him as a dithering leader who not only was not capable of taking any firm decisions good for the country but made sure that no one else did so as long as his party was in power and now things have become so bad because of their communal policies that it is an uphill task. But, no matter what I sincerely hope that Modi gets to rule for at least 2 more terms to undo all the wrong doings of the previous governments.. We have had enough of the so called democratic, psuedo secular rules ..

http://india.wikia.com/wiki/Uniform_civil_code

It was not done to please any section as you are alleging. The common civil code was opposed by tall leaders like Rajendra Prasad and Sardar Patel. It was to be done when acceptability would be higher. You are only condemning without facts . Let Modi get as many terms as people will give him. But for common code even one term is enough. Will should be there.

usha manohar wrote:

The fact of the matter was that Nehru did not bring in Uniform civil code because  of musilm opposition...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/68-years-after-Independence-consensus-on-uniform-civil-code-remains-elusive/articleshow/49397679.cms

 This is a fact

 

It is work known fact, what is point in repeating it again and again.He could not get consensus and passed only the Hindu Code Bill. But what stopped following PMs bringing UCC. Present government Law Minister told SC that UCC cannot be brought till there is consensus. Then why blame Nehru and sing praises of present set up I can not understand.

yes why to sing praises on past, its better to move forward and make our future beautiful 

Our present stands on what the past was, we can see it in the continued battle for Kashmir which is a leftover from the past. It can neither be repaired nor erased but we have to put up with enormous amount of expenditure, so many unnecessary deaths and so on..There is a saying that old sins cast long shadows !

By your analogy then the future stands on the present. So if in present we are all the time brooding on the past then in future we will continue to do the same. Break the cycle and be positive is what I am trying to advocate, but you see in me all things which I am not ranging from communal  to sikular and god knows what all.

usha manohar wrote:

Our present stands on what the past was, we can see it in the continued battle for Kashmir which is a leftover from the past. It can neither be repaired nor erased but we have to put up with enormous amount of expenditure, so many unnecessary deaths and so on..There is a saying that old sins cast long shadows !

Yes babu don't know that DNA transfer in next generation. We get these problem from past and still these are with us.

vijay wrote:

By your analogy then the future stands on the present. So if in present we are all the time brooding on the past then in future we will continue to do the same. Break the cycle and be positive is what I am trying to advocate, but you see in me all things which I am not ranging from communal  to sikular and god knows what all.

I call a certain party communal, sikular etc etc and I thought you are not particular about any  political party , so it is not meant for you ...However, I totally agree that there is no point in brooding about the past unless it comes up on its own and creates a problem, at which stage we have to deal with it and automatically everything that is related to it comes alive 

The past is passed and the present is present. In my view, Modi is missing a great chance to have a date with history, by idling away on Kashmir and Article 370.He suffers from election syndrome and like Congress is cultivating vote banks. What interpretation one can give to his action of buckling to Jat and Patel agitation?. I am afraid this will be bad for history. Secondly, I feel Muslims will at some stage press for another division ( maybe 50-60 years) hence. They have no say in governance.Despite a population percentage of 15, they have just 5-6 MPs.

Here Nehru and congress are blamed for not bringing so called uniform civil code. In fact, there appears some sort of consensus.  The current political outfit also has no intention to bring the so called common civil code. The fact remains that even Sikhs want separate code.  India is a multi religious multi culture and multi linguists country. So there cannot be common personal law for all throughout the country. There is already common law on business, crime, civil law. However even here, states have also concurrent power and so many provisions of even criminal law procedure are not same everywhere. For example, in some states you don't have provision for anticipatory bail unlike others. Then you have separate law- namely Armed forces special Powers act in J & K and some other states. So there is not common law even in criminal and defence matters.  In order to bring common civil law, will there be support for removing armed Forces special powers from J & K and some other states in North East. Even in budgetary matters, there is no common law. The sale tax/ vat rates differ among states.

In all fairness, we should understand that we are a federal or quasi federal state and so cannot have common legal provisions in all matters- particularly those relating to marriage, divorce, succession.  

Which problems will UCC solve? May be indicated.

well India is a very sensible and emotional country any words in small fights also,goes upon religions and cause a chaos in the society 

vijay wrote:

Which problems will UCC solve? May be indicated.

UCC will solve no problems. In fact, we are better without this. Various religious communities have different customs. Even Hindus have different customs. So personal law governing marital relations, customs, succession cannot be uniform. The votaries of so called uniform civil code wish to thrust the Hindu Law on others.  Not only Muslims but even tribal have unique system. Many tribal have matriarchal social system. I wonder how they will be adjusted in so called uniform civil code.

I believe that the current ruling alliance also understands that the uniform civil code is not worth even for discussion. That is why they have put this in cold storage.  

But many see it as cause of injustice to Hindus.

vijay wrote:

But many see it as cause of injustice to Hindus.

 

On the other hand, I see as undue benefit to Hindu capitalist and business class. The unique artificial identity of 'Hindu Undivided Family' is available only to Hindus. This concept of HUF enables the rich Hindus to reduce tax liability and form multiple firms with a view to save taxes. Not only this, even the gods/ goddesses/ deities can be used by rich Hindus to save tax. They can even make the deities tax paying entities, run business in partnership with the deities or in their names. They can even have separate account of deities. All the cash even in name of deities belongs actually to them (Hindu businessmen) but they pay less or no tax.

I suggest that it will be good  idea to abolish the concept of artificial juridical persons in name of deities and also the concept of H.U.F. as a step towards uniform law.  

MG Singh wrote:

The past is passed and the present is present. In my view, Modi is missing a great chance to have a date with history, by idling away on Kashmir and Article 370.He suffers from election syndrome and like Congress is cultivating vote banks. What interpretation one can give to his action of buckling to Jat and Patel agitation?. I am afraid this will be bad for history. Secondly, I feel Muslims will at some stage press for another division ( maybe 50-60 years) hence. They have no say in governance.Despite a population percentage of 15, they have just 5-6 MPs.

I am also feeling that Modi show weakness on these two issues. What Jat and Patel done during agitation I think no need to write here. 

 Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the year 1985, the Supreme Court ordered Shah Bano's husband to pay maintenance allowance to Shah Bano after divorce. The Islamic patriarchal minds did not  like women winning a case over men. There were demonstrations and protests.

The SC gave a chance to the government (under Rajiv Gandhi) to initiate the work towards having a Uniform Civil Code. However, Mr. Gandhi succumbed to the pressure of the Muslim community and instead of abolishing separate laws instead of the ones by the Constitution, his government in fact made necessary amendments to negate the effect of the SC judgement.

vijay wrote:

But many see it as cause of injustice to Hindus.