TeamCode:T-10

TeamCode:T-53

JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF QARTH

W.P.(CIVIL) NO. OF 2024.

WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF UNION OF

QARTH

IN THE MATTER OF:

LAW FOR ALL FOUNDATION… .............. PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF QARTH… ..................................... RESPONDENT

Most Respectfully Submitted to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Qarth

WRITTEN SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF TH ERESPONDENT

Counselfor Respondent RESPONDENT

Sd/- Sd/-
 JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

TABLEOFCONTENTS
SL.NO PARTICULARS PAGE
NO
1. TABLE OF CONTENTS ii

2. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS iii

3. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
iv-v
• BOOKS
• DICTIONARY
• LEGISLATIONS
• ARTICLES
• LEGAL DATABASES

4. TABLE OF CASES vi-vii

5. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION viii

6. STATEMENT OF FACTS ix

7. ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION x

8 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS xi
..
9. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
.,
i. Whether the PIL is maintainable in the Supreme Court of Qarth and 12-24
is it feasible to implement Uniform Civil Code in a diverse nation
like Qarth?

ii. Whether the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code infringes

upon the fundamental rights and personal liberties guaranteed under
the Constitution of Qarth?

iii. Whether the State’s interference in the personal laws of its citizens
permissible?

iv. Whether the legal recognition and registration of same-sex unions

should be granted under exiting laws?

10. PRAYER 25

ii
MEMORIALS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

LISTOFABBREVIATIONS

% Percentage

Hon’ble Honourable

UCC Uniform Civil Code

LAF Law for All Foundation

LGBTQ+ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and

Transgender +
Art Article

v. Versus

Dr Doctor

DPSP Directive Principles of State

Policy
SMA Special Marriage Act

NLSA National Legal Services

Authority
AIR All India Report

Gov Government

Anr Another

Ors Others

Pvt Private

SC Supreme Court

SCC Supreme Court Cases

SCR Supreme Court Report

v. Versus

W.P Writ Petition

Md. Mohammed

PIL Public Interest Litigation

iii
MEMORIALS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
 JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

A. BOOKS REFFERED

i. Abhe Singh Yadav, “Law Of Writs; Jurisdiction And Its

Efficiency”, Universal Law Publishing And Company, 1st 2009
ii. All India reports.
iii. D.D. Basu: “Constitution Of India”, Lexis Nexis, Nagpur, 14th Edn. (2009)
iv. D.D. Basu: “Shorter Constitution Of India”, Prentice Hall Of India Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 12thedn.
v. Dr. J.N. Pandey, “Constitutional Law Of India”, Central Law Agency, 51th
Edn.(2013)
vi. Dr. L.M. Shinghvi, “Constitution Of India”, Thomsonreuters,
New Delhi, Vol.2, 3rd Edn., 2013
vii. H.M. Seervai, “Constitutional Law Of India”, Universal Law Publication, 25 th Edn.
(Rep2012)
viii. J.C. Johari, “The Constitution Of India”, N.M. Tripathi Pvt. Ltd., Bombay, 4thedn.
ix. Jain M.P., “Indian Constitutional Law”, Wadhwa And Company, Nagpur, 5th
Edn.(Rep.2005)
x. Madhusudan Saharay, “Law Of Writs”, Premier Publishing Co., (2009).
xi. P.M. Bakshi, “The Constitution Of India”, Universal
Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 9thedn.
xii. P.M. Bakshi, Jaswant Singh, Deepak Arora, “The Constitution Of India” Vol. I
And Vol. Ii., Madras Journal Law Office,Madras.
xiii. Supreme Courtcases.
xiv. V.N. Shukla, “Constitution Of India”, Eastern Book Company, 12th Edn.(2013)

iv
MEMORIALS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
 JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

B. DICTIONARY

1. Black Henry Campbell, black ' s law dictionary 6th ed.,1990

2. Burton William c, legal thesaurus, 2nd ed.,1992
3. Garner Bryan, black ' law dictionary, 7thed
4. Garner Bryan, modern legal usage, 1991
5. Pramanatha's Aiyer's, "law lexicon", 2nd ed.,1997
6. The oxford advanced learner dictionary, 6th ed.2003
7. Wharton, law lexicon, 14th ed.1993

C. LEGISLATIONS

1. The Special Marriage Act, 1954

2. Constitution Of India, 1950
3. UCC of Uttarakhand, 2024
4. UCC of Goa, 1867
5. Protection of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

D. ARTICLES REFFERED

• http://www.cdjlawjournal.com
• http://www.ebc-india.com
• http://www.indiankanoon.org
• http://www.judisnic.in
• http://www.lawlex.org
• http://www.legalindia.in
• http://www.lexisite.com
• http://www.livelaw.com

E. LEGAL DATABASES

1. Manupatra.
2. SCC Online

v
MEMORIALS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
 JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

TABLE OF CASES

SL.NO NAME OF THE CASE CITATION

1 Smt. Ujjam Bai v. State of Uttar Prades 1962 AIR 1621, 1963 SCR(1)
778
2 Shayara Bano v Union of India AIR 2018 SC (CIV) 1169

3 Navtej Singh Johar & Ors v Union of India AIR 2018 SC 4321, (2018) 10
SCC1
4 Indian young Lawyers Association v. State of AIRONLINE 2018 SC 243
Kerala

5 Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano (1985) 1985 AIR 945, 1985 SCR (3)
844, AIR 1985 SC
6 1985 AIR 935 1985 SCR Supl.
Ms. Jordan Diengdeh v. S S Chopra (1985)
(1) 704 1985 SCC (3) 62 1985
SCALE (1)952
7 Sarla Mudgal, and others v. Union of India AIR 1995 SC 1531
(1995)
8 Pannal Bansilal Pitti and others etc., v. State of 1996 AIR 1023, 1996 SCC (2)
Andra Pradesh and another (1996) 498, AIR 1996 SC 1023
9 Lily Thomas v. Union of India and ors. (2000) 2000 (2) ALD (CRI) 686

10 John Vallamottom v. Union of India (2003) AIR 2003 SC 2902,2003 SCC

611
11 Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India (2014) (2014) 4 SCC 1 AIR 2014 SC
1281, 2014 AIR SCW 1329
12 Nikhil Soni v. Union of India MANU/SC/0335/1996

13 Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation AIR 2014 SC 563

14 State of Bombay v. Narasu Appa Mali AIR 1952 BOM 84, (1951) 53
BOM LR 779, ILR 1951 BOM
775
15 C Masilamani Mudaliar v. Idol of Sri 1996 AIR 1697, JT 1996 (3) 98
Swaminathaswami Thirukoil (1996)
16 Sidebotham in re (1920) 1 Ch 154

vi
MEMORIALS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

17 Shakti Vahini v. UOI & others AIR 2018 SC 1601

18 Shafin Jahan v. Ashokan K. M AIRONLINE 2018 SC 1136

19 National Legal Services Authority v. UOI AIR 2014 SC 1863, (2014)5 SCC
438
20 Supriyo Chakraborty v. UOI W.P (C ) No. 1011/2022

vii
MEMORIALS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
 JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Writ Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Qarth under
Article 32 of the Constitution of Qarth for the violation of fundamental rights enumerated in part
III of the Constitution. The Respondent maintains that no violation of fundamental rights has
taken place. Therefore, this Hon’ble court need not entertain its jurisdiction in this writ.

Wherein, Article 32 reads as under:

“Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part

(1)The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the
rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed.

(2)The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the
nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warrant and certiorari, whichever may be
appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part.

(3)Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clauses (1) and (2),
Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its
jurisdiction ill or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause (2).

(4)The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for by
this Constitution.

1
Constitution of Qarth pari material with Constitution of India ,herein after referred to as “Constitution”

viii
MEMORIALS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
 JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

• The Republic of Qarth , a sovereign, secular and democratic nation, comprises 28 states
(including Winterfell, Bravos, and Valyria) and 8 Union Territories, with a population of
approximately 1.4 billion. Qarth’s diverse population practices various religions (i.e
Hinduism-80.5%, Islam-13.4%, Christianity-2.3%, and others-3.8%). The Constitution
guarantees freedom of religion, allowing communities to follow traditional customs.
However, recent court decisions have adopted a constitutional perspective when
evaluating customary laws, distinguishing between essential and general religious
practices.

• A notable case in Winterfell involved Farah Minhaj’s divorce and alimony request,
contested by her husband citing Islamic law. This sparked debate on personal law vs.
general statutory provisions, highlighting the need for uniform legal standards in Qarth.
The Republic of Qarth has made significant strides in legal reform. The state of Bravos
Civil Code for 155 years, originating from the Dothraki Civil Code of 1867. This
framework has set a moral precedent, inspiring other jurisdiction to adopt similar
structures.In February 2024, the State of Valyria enacted the Uniform Civil Code of
Valyria, regulating marriage, divorce, succession, live-in relationships, and related
matters. However, this code requires couples in live-in relationships to register with
district authorities, essentially giving it a marital legal status.

• Mitchell Pritchett and Cameron Tucker, a same- sex couple, faced barriers registering their
marriage due to existing legislation restricting recognition to heterosexual couples. This
highlighted the lack of inclusivity for LGBTQ+ individuals. To address inconsistencies,
the Union of Qarth enacted a comprehensive Uniform Civil Code, effective nationwide.
Modeled after the Valyrian Civil Code, it ensures uniformity, upholds equality, and aligns
with the Directive Principles of State Policy. The Uniform Civil Code(UCC) in Qarth has
sparked significant controversy, particularly among minority groups concerned that their
religious and customary practices may be undermined by the majority religion. The
government argues that the UCC is crucial for promoting equality, secularism, and
uniformity among citizens.

• Amid all this heated debates Law for All Foundation(LAF) a non-profiting organization
approached Hon’ble Supreme Court of Qarth under a writ challenging constitutional
validity of UCC.
ix
MEMORIALS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
 JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

ISSUES RAISED

ISSUE –I

Whether the PIL is maintainable in the Supreme Court of Qarth and is it feasible to
implement Uniform Civil Code in a diverse nation like Qarth?

ISSUE-II

Whether the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code infringes upon the fundamental
rights and personal liberties guaranteed under the constitution of Qarth?

ISSUE-III

Whether the State’s interference in the personal laws of its’ citizens permissible?

ISSUE- IV

Whether the legal recognition and registration of same-sex unions should be granted
under existing laws?

x
MEMORIALS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
 JSSLC INTRA-COLLEGIATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024-2025.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

I.Whether the PIL is maintainable in the Supreme Court of Qarth and is it feasible to
implement Uniform Civil Code in a diverse nation like Qarth?

It is most humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the PIL is not maintainable, as
implementation of the UCC is a legislative matter, and courts should not interfere with policy
decisions, the law challenged here is pertaining to DPSP and not under part III of the
Constitution. And it is necessary to implement UCC in a diverse nation like Qarth to create
uniform legal framework.

II.Whether the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code infringes upon the fundamental
rights and personal liberties guaranteed under the constitution of Qarth?

It is most humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the implementation of UCC doesn’t
infringes personal liberties & fundamental rights, as Article 25 which guarantees freedom to
practice religion are also subjected to reasonable restrictions, And UCC promotes equality by
eliminating discriminatory practices as subjected under Article 14 of the Constitution.

III. Whether the State’s interference in the personal laws of its’ citizens permissible?

It is most humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the state has a duty to protect
fundamental rights, and when personal laws violate such rights and is found to be
discriminatory , then the state is justified in enacting reforms .

IV.Whether the legal recognition and registration of same-sex unions should be granted
under existing laws?

It is most humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that societal acceptance of same-sex
unions is evolving and legislature must amend laws in line with changing societal values, and
a gradual modernization of personal law through the UCC to ensure uniform legal treatment
of all citizens is necessary.

xi
MEMORIALS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

I. WHETHER THE PIL IS MAINTAINABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF QARTH

AND IS IT FEASIBLE TO IMPLEMENT UNIFORM CIVIL CODE IN A DIVERSE
NATION LIKE QARTH?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Qarth that the PIL is not
maintainable (1.1) and it is feasible to implement Uniform Civil Code in a diverse nation like
Qarth (1.2).

1.1 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION.

Article 32 deals with the ‘Right to Constitutional Remedies’, or affirms the right to move
the supreme court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred in Part
III of the Constitution of Qarth.1
Article 32 is a fundamental right envisaged under Part III of the Constitution of Qarth. If any
fundamental right is violated by the government, then Article 32 empowers the person whose
fundamental right has been violated to approach the Supreme Court for the enforcement of his/her
fundamental rights
In the case Smt. Ujjam Bai v. State of Uttar Prades,the Supreme Court held that- It is also
true, as held by this court, that the right of an aggrieved party to resort to this court under that
Article isitself a fundamental right under Art.32. But the right of resort to this Court under
Art.32(1) is only when there is an infringement of a fundamental right which had been guaranteed
in Part III, that it is Articles 14 to 31 that declare what those, fundamental rights are, for the breach
of which remedy can be had under Art.32(2), and that what has to be seen, therefore, is whether
there is anything in the Article which is said to have been infringed, which is repugnant to the
definition of “the State” in Article12.2

1.Constitution of Qarth.
2..1962 AIR 1621, 1963 SCR(1) 778
12
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.

Although, PIL is a power given by the court to the public via judicial activism, the party that
introduced the PIL needs to prove the intent behind it. The party needs to show that the PIL affects
the public at large and that particular case isn’t a litigation for personal gain or a case to solve any
personal agitations. The PIL is a weapon which has to be used with utmost care in order to serve
basic human rights. In this matter the petitioner have no right locus standi rule because:
Principle of secularism by promoting equality and justice for all citizens, regardless of their
religious beliefs.
1. There is no violation of Article 25 & 26, as it only imposes reasonable restrictions in the
interest of public order and morality.
2. Under Article 44 it is stated that,“ The State should try to ensure that everyone in India has
the same civil code.”
3. It seeks to challenge a law that has been constitution passed.
4. State can regulate personal laws to ensure equality and remove discrimination, as seen in the
case of Shayara Bano v Union of India.3
5. The current legal framework in the country only recognizes heterosexual marriages, and any
reform regarding same-sex unions should be left to the legislature, not the court.

1.1.1 LOCI STANDI

The petitioner doesn’t have loci standi in front of the Hon’ble court as mentioned in the
case Sidebotham, in re, “the word ‘person aggrieved’ do not really mean a man who is
disappointed of a benefit which he might have received if some other order had been made.4

1.2 FEASIBILITY TO IMPLEMENT UNIFORM CIVIL CODE.

The USA is a federal republic with diverse populations, including various states with their
own local laws similar to Qarth. The adoption of a UCC in Qarth follows the same logic as the
USA’s efforts to bring some uniformity to state laws via modal codes. The Qarth’s UCC is
similarly designed to balance the state’s interest in promoting equality with the personal freedoms
of its citizens. Courts have consistently upheld laws in the USA that align with equality principles
over religious exemptions, showing that Qarth’s actions are reasonable.

3.AIR 2018 SC (CIV) 1169

4.(1920) 1 Ch 154

13
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.

Qart’s UCC seeks to ensure that personal laws do not infringe on constitutional rights, and UCC
does not abolish religious practices but instead aligns them with the constitutional mandate for
equality. It imposes reasonable restrictions on religious practices to uphold equality and secularism.
While many countries around world have adopted and recognized LGBTQ+ rights and same –sex
marriage,Qarth is still navigating LGBTQ+ rights, the UCC aligns with broader constitutional goals
of equality and can eventually evolve to include same-sex unions.
The court invoked “Doctrine of Progressive Realization of Rights” to underline that societal
morality changes over time, and laws must evolve to reflect the progressive realization of
constitutional rights, particularly for marginalized communities like LGBTQ+ individuals in the
landmark case Navtej Singh Johar & Ors v. Union of India. and court affirmed that members of the
LGBTQ+ community are entitled to equal rights and protection under the Constitution, and any
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is unconstitutional5.
The implementation of UCC is necessary to ensure equality and uniformity in personal laws, as
directed by the Directive Principles of State Policy under article 44,The case Sarla Mudgal v. Union
of India called for enactment of a UCC to promote national integration.6
It will cause a relief to the legal system as there will be a decrease in the number of filling cases
of each religion with separate personal laws to follow. The court will not be much burdened with
personal laws cases only deal with common ones and the work will be far better with it because with
constant overlapping provisions of law would be avoided. Lastly, in order to deal with the issue of
vote bank politics, as a voter we know that each political party gains votes based on religion and if
there will be a common law then resultant no room for politicizing issues that create discrimination.
Hence, it can be concluded that it is necessary to implement a Uniform Civil Code in a diverse
Country like Qarth.

“Therefore, it is submitted that the PIL is not maintainable in the Supreme Court of Qarth and it is
feasible to implement Uniform Civil Code in a diverse nation like Qarth”

5.AIR 2018 SC 4321, (2018) 10 SCC1

6.AIR 1995 SC 1531

14
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.
II.WHETHER THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNIFORM CIVIL CODE INFRINGES
UPON THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND PERSONAL LIBERTIES GUARANTEED
UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF QARTH?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Qarth that the implementation
of the Uniform Civil Code doesn’t infringes upon the fundamental rights and personal liberties
guaranteed under the constitution of Qarth.UCC seeks to harmonize personal laws with
constitutional values, specifically equality before law and non-discrimination under Article 14. And
the current personal laws are often discriminatory, particularly against women, and that the UCC
would ensure equal treatment for all citizens, regardless of religion. And certain judicial precedents
where courts have prioritized constitutional principles over personal laws in cases related to
women’s rights and social justice.
As mentioned by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar that, “I personally do not understand why religion
should be given this vast, expansive jurisdiction so as cover the whole of life and to prevent the
legislature from encroaching upon that field. After all, what are we having this liberty for? We are
having this liberty in order to reform our social system, which is so full of inequities,
discriminations and other things, which conflict with our fundamental rights. It is, therefore, quite
impossible for anybody to conceive that the personal law shall be excluded from the jurisdiction of
the State.”

2.1 SECULARISM.

Secularism in the preamble of the Constitution of India is described as all the religious i.e.
Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Islam, Jainism and Christianity are all equal in this state, and India
is not a state with only one religion.
UCC can promote pure form of secularism in India it is selective secularism currently at its rule,
but after the application of UCC it will be real therefore, not violation of right to religion, it just
means every person will be treated equally and not with limitations. Equality among religion and
plus among Indians will contribute to feeling of oneness.

2.2 ARTICLE 14 TO 18.

Article 14: Provides for equality before the law and equal protection of laws.
Article 15: Prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.

15
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.

Article 16: Provides for equality of opportunity in public employment.

Article 17: Abolishes untouchability.
Article 18: Abolishes titles.

Right to equality (Article 14 to 18) includes it with embracing the nation’s different groups’
liberties and rights provided under the Constitution. Equality before law, where different religion
has different laws the UCC will provide only common law to be practice by all.

* The UCC does not infringe on fundamental rights as it applies universally and not selectively to
any one community, ensuring equality before law. In the case John Vallamattom v. Union of
India, the court highlighted the necessity of a UCC for uniformity and equality.7

* The UCC seeks to promote equality and does not infringe upon religious freedoms, as religious
practices can still be followed in non-personal law matters.

*Personal liberty must align with constitutional principles of equality, secularism, and non-
discrimination, which the UCC promotes. As mentioned in the Sabarimala Case of 2018.

*The UCC ensures uniformity in personal laws, which is a necessary step towards national
integration and upholding constitutional values, in the case Lily Thomas v. Union of India, the
court emphasized the need for uniformity in laws for the integrity of the nation.8

2.3 WOMEN’S WELFARE.

The protection of rights of women, Uniform Civil Code will also help in improving the
condition of women in India. As it is well established that our society is patriarchal and
misogynistic which to an extent has stopped today due to recognition of women’s rights define by
various laws made in the 20th century and by allowing old religious rules to continue to govern the
family life we are condemning all Indian women living in an Indian society.

7.AIR 2003 SC 2902, 2003 SCC 611

8.2000 (2) ALD (CRI) 686

16
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.

A Uniform Civil Code will help in changing these age-old traditions that have, where we do
understand that women should be treated fairly and given equal rights. In a landmark case, Indian
Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (Sabarimala case), the Supreme Court ruled in
favor of gender equality by allowing women into the Sabarimala temple, the dissenting opinion
emphasized the importance of protecting religious practices that are essential to the community’s
faith9. In such instants where there is conflict between fundamental rights and personal laws it is
easier to bring a law which upholds the both.

2.4 LGBTQ+.

The need for a progressive nation after 70 plus years of Independence we have seen many
changes in laws and society of India and the addition of UCC can be drastic change it is a sign that
the nation has moved away from caste and religious politics also might be right to say that socially.
In the case Nikhil Soni v. Union of India, the court highlighted the legislative domain in matters
concerning societal reforms.10 A Uniform Civil Code will help society move forward and take India
towards its goal of becoming a developed nation. Homogeneity in laws is important otherwise the
mixed culture will grab the power of unity. And upholding the equality and laws requirement for
rise of new community called LGBTQ+, the fight for demand of their laws in court is ongoing but
bringing down with UCC their rights will be enhanced and treated as common law like all. In the
case Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundataion, the court held that legislative reforms are
needed for recognizing same- sex unions.11
Qarth being a secular, socialistic, democratic & republic nation has already set up
framework for it though as the growing changes in society there is also a need for changes in law to
be a modern progressive nation therefore UCC will evaporate the issues present between religions
and nullify the gap between them.

“Therefore, it is submitted that the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code doesn’t infringes
upon the fundamental rights and personal liberties guaranteed under the Constitution of Qarth”

9.AIRONLINE 2018 SC 243

10.MANU/SC/0335/1996
11.AIR 2014 SC 563

17
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.

III.WHETHER THE STATE’S INTERFERENCE IN THE PERSONAL LAWS OF ITS’

CITIZENS PERMISSIBLE?

It is respectfully submitted the State’s interference in personal laws is permissible under the
Constitutional framework of Qarth, especially to uphold values of equality, secularism, and non-
discrimination. The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) enacted by the Union of Qarth is a step toward
ensuring that personal laws do not infringe on the fundamental rights of individuals and that the
principles of justice and equity prevail across diverse communities.

3.1 BENEFITS OF STATE’S INTERFERENCE THROUGH UNIFORM CIVIL CODE.

• UCC would ensure equal rights and treatment for all citizens, regardless of their religious
background, aligning with Article 14 of the Qarth’s Constitution.
• It would standardize marriage laws, promoting gender equality and religious neutrality.
• The recent implementation of UCC in Uttarakhand, banning polygamy and setting a uniform
marriage age at 21 for all, serves as a model for national implementation.
• UCC could address issues like triple talaq, unequal inheritance righyts, and child marriage,
which are often discriminatory towards women.
• NFHS-5 data shows that 23.3% of women aged 20-24 were married before the age of 18, and
a UCC could help to reduce this figure.
• Qarth’s current personal law system, based on religion, creates legal complexity.
• UCC would simplify this system, making it easier for courts to administer justice and for
citizens to understand their rights.
• It could reduce the judicial backlog caused by personal law disputes and streamline legal
processes.
• UCC would promote national integration by prioritizing citizenship over religious identity in
civil matters.
• The successful implementation of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha (BNS) and Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhitha (BNSS) across all communities shows that unified law can work in Qarth’s
diverse society.

18
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.
• UCC could help reform outdated practices across all communities and align personal laws
with contemporary social values.
• The legalization of same-sex relationships by the Supreme Court in 2018 highlights the need
for modernized personal laws.
• UCC could address LGBTQ+ rights in marriage, adoption, and inheritance, which are not
uniformly recognized under current personal laws.
• Countries with diverse populations, like Turkey, have successfully implemented infied civil
codes.
• UCC could align Qarth with international human rights standards and improve its ranking on
global indices, such as the Global Gender Gap index, where Qarth currently ranks 129 th out of
146 countries.

3.2 JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENT

1.Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano (1985) : The Court upheld a Muslim woman’s right to
maintenance, linking UCC to national integration.12
2.Ms. Jordan Diengdeh v. S S Chopra (1985) : Highlighted inconsistencies in divorce laws and
called for legal uniformity.13
3.Sarla Mudgal, and others v. Union of India (1995): Strongly favoured UCC, especially for the
majority Hindu population, questioning the delay in its implementation.14
4.Pannal Bansilal Pitti and others etc., v. State of Andra Pradesh and another (1996) :
Acknowledged India’s pluralism and argued for gradual implementation of UCC.15
5.Lily Thomas v. Union of India and ors. (2000) : The Supreme Court emphasized the significance
of UCC in terms of succession.16
6.John Vallamottom v. Union of India (2003) : Struck down discriminatory provisions in
Christian personal law, reiterating the need for UCC. 17

12.1985 AIR 945, 1985 SCR (3) 844, AIR 1985 SC

13.1985 AIR 935 1985 SCR Supl (1) 704 1985 SCC (3) 62 1985 SCALE (1) 952
14.AIR 1995 SC 1531
15.1996 AIR 1023, 1996 SCC (2) 498, AIR 1996 SC 1023
16.2000 (2) ALD (CRI) 686
17. AIR 2003 SC 2902, 2003 SCC 611

19
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.
7.Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India (2014) : Linked the Juvenile Justice Act to UCC, emphasizing
the need for secular laws.18
8.Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017) : Addressed Triple Talaq, reigniting the UCC debate but
seperating it form the issue of human rights.19
In the Republic of Qarth, the state’s interference in personal laws is vital for ensuring fairness and
equality for all citizens.
Article 14 guarantees everyone the right to equality, which becomes important when personal laws,
like those in Winterfell that deny women alimony based on religious rules, lead to unfair treatment.
Article 19 allows people to push for changes, as shown by Mitchell and cameron, who are fighting
for recognition of their relationship.
Article 21 protects the right to life and personal liberty, making it necessary for the state to step in
when personal laws threaten individual dignity, especially in inheritance issues.
Article 25 supports the freedom of religion, it also allows the state to intervene when religious
practices harm fundamental rights, as seen in the debates around the Uniform Civil Code.
Article 26 gives people the right to manage their own religious affairs, but the state’s role in
regulating these practices ensures they follow constitutional values.
Overall, the state’s involvement is crucial for creating a fair society that respects the diverse
cultures of Qarth while protecting everyone’s rights.

3.3 SCOPE FOR INTERFERENCE IN PERSONAL LAWS

In the landmark case, State of Bombay v. Narasu Appa Mali, the Court established that the
personal laws are exempted from the purview of Article 13 of the constitution.
The Judgment identifies two key reasons for this:
1.Personal laws are Not “Laws” : The court ruled that personal laws do not fall under the definitions
of ‘Law’ as per Article 13(3)(a), which includes various legal instruments but excludes personal
laws.
2.Personal Laws atre Not “Laws in Force” : It was also determined that personal laws do not
qualify as “laws in force” under Article 13(3)(b), which pertains to laws enacted by legislative
authorities before the Constitution’s commencement.

18.(2014) 4 SCC 1 AIR 2014 SC 1281, 2014 AIR SCW 1329

19.AIR 2018 SC (CIV) 1169

20
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.
Thus, This case remains a binding precedent on the relationship between Article 13 and Personal
laws in Qarth.
*‘Justice Chagla’ emphasized that Section 113 of the Government of Qarth Act, 1915
distinguishes between ‘Personal laws’ and ‘Customs having the force of law’. He argued that the
Constitution Assembly intentionally excludes personal laws from the definition of “Law” in
Article13.
This exclusion is further supported by the presence of other constitutional provisions, such as
Articles 17, 25, and 26, which address specific aspects of personal laws. Justice Chagla asserted
that, Article 44 highlights the need for a Uniform Civil Code, while ‘Entry 5’ of the Concurrent list
allows for legislative amendments to personal laws. He concluded that personal laws are outside the
scope of Part III of the Constitution, underscoring their exclusion from Article 13.20

In C Masilamani Mudaliar v. Idol of Sri Swaminathaswami Thirukoil (1996), the Court

emphasized that Article 14 of the Constitution aims to eliminate gender-based inequalities,
particularly regarding the property rights of Hindu Women. It stated that personal laws, derived
from religious scriptures, must align with the Constitution; otherwise, they could be deemed void
under Article 13 if they violate fundamental rights. The Court highlighted that the right to equality
is fundamental and noted that Parliament enacted Section 14 of Hindu Succession Act to address
historical disabilities affecting Hindu women’s property rights. Section 14(1) expands the scope of
property acquisition for Hindu women, thereby remedying discrimination in this area.21

Hence, The State can intervene in personal laws to ensure equality and non-disrimination,
protect fundamental rights, promote social justice and welfare, uphold human rights and
international commitments, as mandated by the Constitution and Judicial Precedents.

“Therefore,it is submitted that the state’s interference in the personal laws of its’ citizens is
permissible, as it upholds the fundamental rights of the citizens.”

20.AIR 1952 BOM 84, (1951) 53 BOM LR 779, ILR 1951 BOM 775
21.1996 AIR 1697, JT 1996 (3) 98

21
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.
IV.WHETHER THE LEGAL RECOGNITION AND REGISTRATION OF SAME-SEX
UNIONS SHOULD BE GRANTED UNDER EXISTING LAWS?

It is respectfully submitted that, the legal recognition and registration of same-sex unions
should not be granted under existing personal laws as, it would perpetuate inconsistencies,
discrimination, and lack of uniformity, thereby undermining the principles of justice, equality, and
dignity of the individuals. Sex includes sexual orientation within it and discrimination based on an
individual’s sexual orientation is objectionable under criminal as well as civil laws. The current
legislations on personal laws only recognizes heterosexual marriages, which undoubtedly denies
homosexual couples of the legal and social recognition as well as the benefits which is conferred
by these legislations to married people. Therefore, amending laws to legalize same-sex unions
may not be feasible option as it can hurtful religious feeling of new sections and subsequently lead
to unfavorable outcomes.

4.1 RECOGNIZING SAME-SEX MARRIAGE UNDER UCC

• Most personal laws in Qarth define marriage as a sacrament between individuals of

different sexes, viewing same-sex relationships as immoral and contrary to religious
customs. Many perceive gay and lesbian marriage as unholy, often attributing them to
western influence. However, this perspective highlights the need for legal under a Uniform
Civil Code to ensure that all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation, have the
right to marry. By establishing a UCC, Qarth can promote equality and inclusivity,
allowing same-sex couples to enjoy the same legal rights and protections as heterosexual
couples, thereby reflecting the diverse and evolving nature of society.

• Violation of Individual’s Rights –In the case of Shakti Vahini v. Union of India and
others, The Supreme Court ruled that an individual’s human rights are not subordinate to
family or community honor. It reaffirmed that the right to choose a life partner is a
fundamental right, stating that marriage between two consenting adults does not require
family or clan approval. This choice is recognized under Articles 19 and 21 of the
Constitution.22
22.AIR 2018 SC 1601

22
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.
• The decision in National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (NALSA) is
commendable for addressing gender-based discrimination and offering hope to those
marginalized by the legal system. The bench, consisting of Justice K.S. Panicker
Radhakrishnan and Arjan Kumar Sikri, granted legal recognition to individuals whose
gender identities do not conform to societal norms.23

• In Shafin Jahan v. Ashokan K M, the Supreme Court held that adults have the
fundamental right to choose their partners, reaffirming the principle of personal liberty and
autonomy. Following this reasoning, same-sex unions should be legally recognized to
protect the personal liberty and dignity of LGBTQ+ individuals.24

• However, the existing legal framework for marriage in Qarth still does not recognize
same-sex unions. This creates a need for judicial intervention or new legislative changes to
ensure that same-sex couples receive the same legal rights and protections as heterosexual
couples.

4.2 WHY NOT UNDER SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT

• Special Marriage Act was originally crafted to create to heterosexual marriages, reflecting
traditional societal norms that prioritize male-female unions. Its provisions, including
eligibility criteria and procedural requirements, are tailored to these relationships.
Attempting to fit same-sex marriages into this existing framework could lead to significant
discrepancies, as the unique dynamics and needs of LGBTQ+ couples are not recognized.
This misalignment may result in legal complications and a lack of adequate support for
same-sex partners.

• The SMA employs gender-specific terms like ‘husband’ and ‘wife’, which do not
represent same-sex partnerships. This outdated language can create confusion regarding
the rights and responsibilities of each partner. For same-sex couples, such terminology
may feel invalidating and could complicate legal interpretations related to spousal roles,
obligations, and entitlements. A lack of inclusive language can undermine the recognition
of their relationships and perpetuate feelings of marginalization.

23.AIR 2014 SC 1863, (2014) 5 SCC 438

24.AIRONLINE 2018 SC 1136

23
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.
• Introducing same-sex marriages under the SMA could face significant resistance from
conservation segments of society, leading to protests, legal challenges, and social unrest,
especially in traditional areas. This opposition might disclosure local officials from
processing registrations, creating unnecessary delays for couples seeking legal recognition.
Additionally, the SMA does not currently address the specific legal needs of same-sex
couples, such as adoption, surrogacy, and inheritance rights. If same-sex marriages are
simply added to the existing framework without comprehensive revisions, critical
protections may remain lacking, leaving couples vulnerable to unfavorable legal outcomes.

• The primary case regarding the Special Marriage Act denying same-sex marriage is
Supriyo Chakraborty v. Union of India, where petitioner challenged the constitutionality
of the Act’s definition of marriage as solely between a man and a women, arguing that it
discriminates against same-sex couples and violates their right to equality under the
Qarth’s Constitution; the Supreme Court, in a recent verdict on October 17, 2023, declined
to legalize same-sex marriage under the SMA, leaving the matter to be decided by
Parliament instead.25

• The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Centre and Attorney General of India on a
plea by two gay couples seeking recognition of same-sex marriage under the Special
Marriage Act, 1954. As a result of several petitions, a two-judge bench headed by Chief
Justice of India D Y Chandrachud issued the notice. The non-recognition of same-sex
marriage amounted to discrimination that struck at the root of dignity and self-fulfillment
of LGBTQ+ couples.

“Therefore, it is humbly submitted that the legal recognition and registration of same-sex
unions should not be granted under the existing personal laws.”

25.W.P (C) No. 1011/2022

24
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER
 JSSLCINTRA-COLLEGIATEMOOTCOURTCOMPETITION,2023-2024.

PRAYER

Wherefore, in the light of the facts stated, arguments advanced and authorities cited, it is most
humbly prayed and implored before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, that it may be
graciously pleased to adjudge and declare that:

1. The PIL is not maintainable and request to dismiss the petition

2. There is no infringement of fundamental right and personal liberties by implementation of

Uniform Civil Court.

3. The Sate can interfere in the personal laws of its Citizen.

4. The legal recognition and registration of same-sex unions should not be granted under
existing laws, rather to be bought under Uniform Civil Code of Qarth.

AND/OR

The court may pass any other order that it may deem fit in the favor of the respondent to
meet the ends of equity, justice and good conscience. For this act of Kindness, your Lordships,
the Respondent shall duty bound forever humble pray.

Respectfully submitted,

________________________
(Counsel of the Respondent)

25
MEMORIALSONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER