The newly elected Chief Minister of West Bengal, Suvendu Adhikari, has announced that West Bengal is finally going to introduce the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) very soon. The bill is expected to be introduced in the West Bengal Assembly on Monday. This Uniform Civil Code bill, or UCC law, is not just another piece of legislation; it represents a long-term ideological strategy of the BJP.
UCC was first introduced in Uttarakhand, followed by Gujarat and Assam, and now West Bengal is set to become another state where this issue will be debated. However, if the bill is introduced on Monday, it will not immediately come into effect. It may first be sent to a Select Committee, where members will examine and review the provisions. After the committee’s discussion, the bill can return to the Assembly for final approval.
The Suvendu Adhikari government also has the option to pass the bill directly without sending it to the Select Committee because it has a strong majority in the Assembly. The BJP government has more than a two-thirds majority, which means it has the numbers required to pass such legislation.
However, there is also a debate within the BJP. Since West Bengal has a significant Muslim and Christian population, around 30% Muslims according to political discussions around the issue, some leaders feel that such a major decision should not be rushed. They believe that sending it to a Select Committee would make the process more democratic and allow broader discussion. Regardless of the method, the expectation is that the UCC bill will eventually be passed in West Bengal.
Now, what does this actually mean?
It means creating a common set of laws for all citizens, where personal matters like marriage, divorce, inheritance, and related issues will not be governed separately based on religion. It reflects the BJP’s larger ideological vision of a unified legal framework under the idea of “Akhand Bharat”.
According to the BJP’s argument, there will not be separate personal laws for Hindus, Muslims or Christians. Suvendu Adhikari has said that practices such as “love jihad” and “land jihad” will be addressed through this framework. He has also compared it with the abolition of triple talaq, saying that just as the practice of talaq was removed and Muslim citizens were brought under a common legal system, UCC would create one uniform structure for everyone.
This is why the introduction of UCC in West Bengal is considered politically significant. For the BJP, it is not only a legal reform but also an unfinished ideological agenda.
This is part of the BJP’s vision of a “new West Bengal” and a new approach towards Indian nationalism. The party is trying to connect West Bengal’s political transformation with its larger national ideological project.
But how exactly is this strategy moving forward? What is the larger ideological goal behind it?
To understand this, we need to look at the historical background.
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) was founded in 1925, and later, the Bharatiya Jana Sangh was established in 1951. After years of political struggle, this ideological stream eventually transformed into the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the 1980s. For decades, the Jana Sangh, RSS and BJP have consistently carried forward the same ideological framework.
This ideology is based on the idea of Hindu cultural nationalism, which its supporters describe as Sanatan Hindu nationalism. Later, it developed the Nehruvian model of secularism and socialism and took India in a different direction.
During the freedom movement, Indian nationalism had different streams. The Congress leadership fought against British colonial rule, while another stream of right-wing nationalism also emerged. Leaders such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak represented a form of Hindu nationalist thought, which later influenced organisations like the Hindu Mahasabha and eventually the RSS. There was also an aggressive strain of Hindu nationalism by Savarkar.
When Nehru was elected as the prime minister back then, Babu Rajendra Prasad was the president, whose philosophy of Hindutva was quite strong; the same applied to Sardar Patel’s Hindu philosophy. After independence, Jawaharlal Nehru’s model of secularism became dominant in Indian politics. However, the BJP and RSS continued to argue for a different interpretation of Indian identity, rooted in Hindu cultural traditions.
When Atal Bihari Vajpayee became prime minister, and L.K. Advani and the RSS became one of the most influential leaders of the BJP, issues like cultural nationalism, Ram temple construction, Article 370 and the Uniform Civil Code remained central parts of the party’s ideological agenda.
Among these issues, UCC has remained one of the major goals of the BJP for decades. However, critics argue that this approach is an attempt to create religious polarisation by bringing identity issues into politics.
Now, the same ideological framework is being extended to West Bengal.
The BJP’s interest in Bengal has a special connection with history. Dr Syama Prasad Mukherjee, one of the founders of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, was himself from Bengal. He played an important role in arguing for the creation of West Bengal during Partition, opposing the idea of the entire Bengal becoming part of Pakistan.
Syama Prasad Mukherjee had several discussions regarding this refugee issue with Nehru, along with sending several letters to him. Because of this historical association, the BJP often presents Syama Prasad Mukherjee as a symbol of Bengali Hindu identity and nationalism.
The celebration of West Bengal Day, the focus on Bengal’s history, and the emphasis on Syama Prasad Mukherjee’s legacy are all connected with this political narrative. The BJP organised the Bisho Hindu Mahasabha in Tarakshawer to celebrate West Bengal Day by talking about Bengali identity and Bengali language.
BJP still believes that, without Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, West Bengal would not have been developed.
Whereas the opposition party argues that not only Shyama Prasad Mukherjee but also several Congress leaders had supported the development of West Bengal during the partition. The fight for establishing the identity of West Bengal as a province.
The BJP believes that West Bengal has remained outside its ideological influence for a long time because of decades of Left rule and later the Trinamool Congress government. According to the party’s argument, communist politics and later TMC politics created a different political culture in Bengal, while the BJP wants to establish a new ideological direction.
BJP mainly includes West Bengal for two reasons. Firstly, the involvement of Shyama Prasad Mukherjee and the presence of communism and leftism, because of which Bengal still has a 30% Muslim majority. Here, polarism was very strong, and the Western secularism model was followed very strongly.
Now all these issues are tied together. Currently, the BJP is not trying to create any issue about Ram Mandir, as it is a UP-based issue rather than a Bengali-centric one. Bengalis are more bothered by infiltrations and ‘ghusbatiya’. Moreover, the BJP is planning to go on a campaign by drawing a bridge between Pakistan and Jamaat from Bangladesh.
Shubhendu Adhikari, after becoming chief minister, appears to be trying to follow a model similar to Yogi Adityanath’s and Amit Shah’s political style. He wants to build an image of being a strong Hindu nationalist leader in Bengal and present himself as the face of this new political identity. He is following the BJP central leadership, and they are planning to follow the Bengali communist model, which was not even done by Mamata. Mamata had no separate ideology regarding this, but still had an extension of ‘CPMism’.
However, for this transformation to succeed, the BJP believes that the political influence of Mamata Banerjee must first be weakened completely. The party believes that Mamata’s political image has already suffered damage to some extent, along with the support base that once strongly backed her. According to this strategy, the Mamata Banerjee and Abhishek Banerjee leadership model within the TMC has to be challenged and politically neutralised.
One of the ways the BJP is moving forward is by highlighting corruption allegations against the Trinamool Congress. The party has focused on exposing leaders accused of corruption and using these controversies to question the credibility of the TMC organisation.
The repeated public protests against TMC leaders, including incidents where eggs were thrown at them, became a major political spectacle. The BJP and its supporters used these incidents as a symbol of public anger against the ruling party. Some people even referred to this phase as “eggocracy”, suggesting that the throwing of eggs became a visible expression of frustration among people.
However, the BJP has also faced criticism over some of its own decisions, especially the controversy around the midday meal scheme in schools. The decision to involve ISKCON in providing mid-day meals and the changes made in the food menu created a political debate in Bengal.
Earlier, eggs were a regular part of the midday meal system in many schools. Under the new arrangement, meals including soya bean, paneer and rajma chawal were introduced. Several opposition leaders argued that this move was not just about nutrition but reflected an attempt to promote vegetarianism in Bengal, where non-vegetarian food habits are deeply connected with Bengali culture.
The debate, therefore, became larger than just a question of food. It turned into a discussion about cultural identity, freedom of choice and whether political ideology was influencing everyday life.
This entire debate is connected with the broader discussion around Hindu Sanatani nationalism and the BJP’s cultural politics.
The BJP argues that organisations like ISKCON are trusted institutions and can ensure better management and transparency in the mid-day meal system. The party also claims that earlier, during the TMC government, the scheme faced several corruption allegations, and bringing in a reputed organisation would reduce irregularities.
But critics see it differently. They argue that Bengal has historically had a strong non-vegetarian food culture and that replacing eggs with vegetarian alternatives sends a symbolic political message. They believe the issue is not only about meals but about whether a particular cultural identity is being promoted over another.
The larger question is how Bengalis themselves are responding to these changes.
Interestingly, even among Muslims in West Bengal, there has not been a major protest or public reaction against the proposed Uniform Civil Code so far. This raises a question: have sections of the Muslim community accepted the idea that there will no longer be separate personal laws or special provisions?
For example, during Eid celebrations, the traditional Namaz arrangement at Red Road was shifted to Brigade Parade Ground, and there was no major protest over the change. Similarly, International Yoga Day celebrations at Red Road also took place without significant opposition.
These developments raise important questions. Are these changes signs of suppression of liberty and freedom, or are they part of a new democratic political model emerging through the BJP’s Hindu nationalist framework?
A new Bengal appears to be taking shape.
The question now is whether Bengalis themselves are ready to move away from the Left’s long-standing radical and pluralistic political model and connect with the BJP’s idea of “Akhand Bharat” and cultural nationalism.
Is Bengal witnessing a new ideological transformation under the BJP regime?
