Special Correspondent: Muslim organisations took to the streets in Jaipur to protest the Rajasthan government’s proposed Uniform Civil Code (UCC), later attempting to march towards the state Assembly before police stopped them with barricades.

The protesters eventually submitted a memorandum to government officials, urging the state government to withdraw the proposed legislation.

The protest was organised by the Rajasthan Muslim Forum at the Muslim Musafirkhana on Moti Doongri Road after Friday prayers. A large number of men and women participated, raising concerns over the proposed law and its potential impact on Muslim personal law.

After the gathering, the protesters began marching towards the Assembly. Police personnel tried to stop them, leading to a heated exchange. As the crowd continued to press forward, police eventually allowed the protesters to proceed up to a designated point, where officials received their memorandum.

The protest came hours after the BJP government introduced the Rajasthan UCC Bill, 2026, in the state Assembly.

The Bill was tabled but is not expected to be taken up for detailed consideration until November, when the Assembly is scheduled to reconvene after the panchayat elections. The House was adjourned sine die shortly after the Bill was introduced amid protests by Opposition members.

The proposed legislation seeks to bring several aspects of personal law under a common framework in Rajasthan and would also apply to Rajasthan residents living outside the state. Scheduled Tribes and certain other communities, however, have been excluded from its scope.

Among other provisions, the Bill lays down conditions for a legally valid marriage and bars a person from marrying while having a living spouse. It retains the minimum marriage age at 21 for men and 18 for women.

At the same time, the Bill recognises marriages solemnised under different customary and religious traditions, including Nikah, Saptapadi, Anand Karaj, Holy Union and Mangal Fera.

The Rajasthan Muslim Forum has criticised the proposed legislation, arguing that it could interfere with religious practices and constitutional protections available to communities.

Speaking to the media, advocate Sarwar Alam, a Forum member, accused the government of disproportionately affecting Muslim personal laws.

“They are bringing in an unconstitutional bill to target Muslim Personal Laws. Muslims are only being targeted. They are calling it a uniform civil code, but how can it be uniform when you are excluding some sections of society in the name of their tradition? It does not remain uniform at all. The bill is against the religious freedom guaranteed by the Constitution.”

They also cited the Seventh Schedule, particularly the Concurrent List, arguing that while the Constitution recognises the existence of personal laws, it does not expressly mandate their abolition.

The Muslim groups have also raised concerns over fundamental rights, arguing that compelling members of a community to give up personal laws rooted in religious texts could have implications for constitutional protections relating to equality, non-discrimination, freedom, privacy, religious practice and cultural rights.