🪶 Wisdom Drop – 38
In-depth Current Affairs Essays for IAS Mains (GS Papers)
Assam Prohibition of Polygamy Bill, 2025: Constitutional Morality, Gender Justice and the Limits of Personal Law
Marriage in India is not merely a private arrangement between individuals; it is a deeply social institution shaped by religion, custom, and law. Consequently, any attempt by the State to reform marital practices inevitably triggers debates around personal liberty, cultural autonomy, and constitutional morality. The Assam Prohibition of Polygamy Bill, 2025, introduced by the Assam government to criminalise polygamy, represents a significant moment in India’s evolving discourse on social reform, gender justice, and the complex relationship between personal laws and fundamental rights.
India’s constitutional framework accommodates legal pluralism in matters of family law. While the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Special Marriage Act, 1954 mandate monogamy, Muslim Personal Law permits polygamy under specific conditions, and certain tribal communities continue to recognise it under customary practices. This diversity reflects India’s commitment to religious freedom and cultural autonomy, but it also creates friction when traditional practices clash with modern understandings of equality and dignity.
The Assam Bill emerges within this plural landscape. Rather than attempting uniform reform across all communities, it represents a State-specific intervention, suggesting a gradual and incremental approach to social reform. This approach acknowledges that social transformation in a diverse society often proceeds unevenly, shaped by local contexts and political will.
At the heart of the Bill lies the intent to criminalise polygamy and treat it as a social offence rather than a private moral choice. The legislation prescribes imprisonment and fines, with enhanced punishment for individuals who conceal an existing marriage before entering another. This focus on concealment highlights the State’s concern with deception and exploitation, particularly of women who may be unaware of their husband’s marital status.
Significantly, the Bill extends liability beyond the individual offender. Religious officials, village heads, parents, and guardians who assist or conceal polygamous marriages are brought within the ambit of punishment. By doing so, the State seeks to disrupt the broader social structures that enable and legitimise the practice, recognising that polygamy often survives not merely through individual choice but through community sanction.
At the same time, the Bill demonstrates constitutional restraint. It excludes areas under the Sixth Schedule and Scheduled Tribes recognised under Article 342, acknowledging the special constitutional protections afforded to tribal autonomy and customary law. Moreover, the law is non-retroactive, ensuring that marriages conducted before its enforcement under valid personal or customary laws remain unaffected. This careful calibration reflects an attempt to balance reform with constitutional sensitivity.
The moral core of the Assam Bill lies in its emphasis on gender justice. Polygamy has historically resulted in economic insecurity, emotional distress, and social marginalisation for women. By criminalising the practice and proposing mechanisms to compensate affected women, the Bill aligns itself with the constitutional guarantees of equality under Article 14 and dignity under Article 21. In this sense, the legislation resonates with judicial trends that prioritise fundamental rights over patriarchal interpretations of personal law.
The Supreme Court’s 2017 judgment invalidating instant triple talaq marked a turning point in this regard, asserting that personal laws cannot override constitutional principles. The Assam Bill can be viewed as a legislative extension of this evolving constitutional ethos, even though it operates at the level of a State rather than the Union.
The concept of constitutional morality is central to understanding the Bill’s significance. Constitutional morality requires that laws and social practices conform to the values enshrined in the Constitution rather than merely reflect historical customs or majoritarian beliefs. By challenging polygamy, the Assam government implicitly asserts that certain traditions must evolve when they conflict with equality and human dignity.
From a federal perspective, the Bill highlights the role of States as laboratories of social reform. In the absence of a Uniform Civil Code, State-level initiatives may increasingly shape the trajectory of personal law reform in India. However, this also raises concerns about legal fragmentation and uneven protection of women’s rights across the country. The Bill’s extra-territorial provisions, which prevent residents from circumventing the law by marrying outside Assam, attempt to address this challenge, though broader harmonisation remains elusive.
Critics of the Bill argue that criminalisation may drive polygamy underground rather than eliminate it. There are also apprehensions about selective targeting and the potential misuse of the law for harassment. Enforcement in rural and socially conservative settings will require sensitivity, institutional capacity, and judicial oversight to ensure that the law protects rather than persecutes.
Moreover, the exemptions granted to tribal communities, while constitutionally justified, reopen long-standing debates about whether customary practices should indefinitely remain beyond the reach of gender equality norms. This tension between cultural autonomy and universal rights remains one of the most difficult challenges in Indian constitutional practice.
Ultimately, legislation alone cannot transform deeply rooted social practices. The Assam Bill must be complemented by legal awareness, women’s education, economic empowerment, and community engagement. Counselling mechanisms, social support systems, and sustained dialogue are essential to ensure that reform is internalised rather than resisted.
In conclusion, the Assam Prohibition of Polygamy Bill, 2025 is not merely a State law addressing a specific marital practice. It is a reflection of India’s ongoing struggle to reconcile tradition with transformation. By foregrounding gender justice while respecting constitutional diversity, the Bill exemplifies the delicate balance required in social reform. Its lasting significance will depend not only on its enforcement but on the broader societal willingness to embrace equality as a living constitutional value.
🌿
“When society outgrows its customs, the Constitution becomes its conscience, reminding us that justice is not inherited from tradition but earned through reform.”
— IAS Monk
