Vol. 13 · pages 1076–1080

1043DRAFT CONSTITUTION With regard to the amendment moved by my Friend, Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad, I cannot understand why we should depart from the principle which has been laid down that any criminal matter which is lodged before the Privy Council before the appointed day may be heard by them for purposes of admission but they would be returned to the Federal Court for final disposal. He wants to make a departure from it but I have not been able to see that the reasons he has advanced warrant it. Therefore I cannot accept his amendment. [Amendment of Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava was rejected and that of Naziruddin Ahmed was withdrawn. Clause 3 was added to the Bill.] ***** Clause 4 ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That for sub-clause (b) of clause 4, the following sub-clauses be substituted : — (b) any Indian appeal or petition on which the Judicial Committee has, after healing the parties, reserved judgment or order; or (c) any Indian appeal which has been entered before the appointed day in the list of business of the Judicial Committee for the Michaelmas sittings of the year 1949 and which after that day is not directed to be removed therefrom by or under the authority of the Judicial Committee; or; and sub-clause (c) be re-lettered as sub-clause (d).” What probably requires some explanation is sub-clause (c). Although we have stated in the main clause that business or cases entered upon the calendar for the Michaelmas term may be left with the Privy Council for disposal, it is not quite certain how many of them may remain undisposed of. Therefore, we propose to give permission to the Privy Council at the outset to say that, although a matter or a case is entered upon the cause list for the Michaelmas term, they will not be able to hear some of the matters, so that there may be no balance of pending cases left. In that event, those cases which the Privy Council directs that they will not be able to hear would also become automatically transferred to the Federal Court. It is to provide for that sort of contingency that I am adding this sub-clause (c) in terms of the amendment. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : Sir, I move : “That sub-clause (c) of clause 4 be deleted.” *CAD, Vol. IX, 17th September 1949, pp. 1599-1600.

1044 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES ...The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I do not accept the amendment of Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava. [Amendment of Pandit Bhargava was rejected. Dr. Ambedkar’s amendment was adopted. Clause 4 was added to the bill.] ***** Clause 5 ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That in sub-clause (3) of Clause 5, for the brackets, letters and word ‘(b) or (c), the brackets, letters and word ‘(b), (c) or (d)’ be substituted.” It is purely consequential. [The amendment was adopted and clause 5, was added to the bill.] ***** Clause 7 ***** †Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Sir, I beg to move : “That is Clause 7, the comma after the word ‘effect’ be deleted.”... Mr. President : I do not think this need be put to vote, this question of ‘comma’. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : This will be looked into. This need not be put to vote. [Clause 7 was added to the Bill.] Clause 8 ***** ‡The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I do not accept the amendment. [The amendment of Mr. B. Das was negatived. Clause 8 was added to the Bill.] Clause 9 #The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, with your permission, I would like to move the amendment which have been put in a somewhat different form because I thought that the amendments as tabled rather create a confusion. If you will allow me, I have put all these in a consolidated form. There is no substantial change at all. It is just a matter of form and I thought that the House would be in a better position to get at the idea of what we are doing in clause 9. *CAD, Vol. IX, 17th September 1949, pp. 1601. † Ibid., p. 1602. ‡ Ibid., p. 1604. # Ibid., pp. 1604-1605.

1045DRAFT CONSTITUTION Mr. President : Yes. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : For clause 9, the following clause be substituted : — “9. (1) In section 205 of the Government of India Act, 1935 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), for sub-section (2) the following sub-section shall be substituted, namely:— “(2) Where such certificate is given, any party in a case may appeal to the Federal Court on the ground that any question us aforesaid has been wrongly decided and, with the leave of the Federal Court, on any other ground.” (2) In section 209 of the said Act, for sub-sections (1) and (2) the following subsections shall be substituted, namely : — “(1) The Federal Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it, including an order for the payment of costs, and any decree so passed or order so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India”.” I should like to add one or two words to be interpolated, which have been omitted : “In the manner provided in that behalf in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, or in such other manner as may be prescribed by or under a law of the Dominion Legislature, or subject to the provisions of any such law, in the manner prescribed by rules made by the Federal Court.” “(3) In clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 210 of the said Act, for the word, brackets and figure “sub-section (2)”, the word, brackets and figure “sub-section (1)” shall be substituted.” “(4) In section 214 of the said Act, after sub-section (1) the following sub-section shall be inserted, namely : —” I should like to add a few words at the beginning. “(IA) Subject to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, or any law made by the Dominion Legislature, the Federal Court may also from time to time, with the approval of the Governor-General, make rules of court for regulating the manner in which any decree passed or order made by it in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction may be enforced.” The object of clause 9 is to make the Federal Court a complete and independent Court. There were certain limitations under the existing Government of India Act, 1935 which prevented the Federal Court from drawing up its own decrees. It had to send the matter to the Trial Court. All these limitations it is necessary to withdraw because the Federal Court is going to take the place of the Privy Council. ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : That amendment, I submit, is outside the scope of the Bill. The Bill deals merely with the transfer of jurisdiction. Amendments of the Government of India Act, 1935. Act V of 1908 Act V of 1908. *CAD, Vol. IX, 17th September 1949, pp. 1605-1606.

1046 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : It is not a question of transfer of jurisdiction. I only give what is contained in clause 5 and am defining what jurisdiction shall be conferred, not leaving it to investigation as to what the prerogative of His Majesty was, I am only making these powers in a concrete form from what it is in the abstract... The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : This Bill does not propose to give any direction to the Federal Court as to the manner in which they should exercise the jurisdiction with which they become vested under the present Bill. ***** Clause 11 ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I do not accept that amendment, it is quite unnecessary. [The amendment of Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad was negatived.] ***** Clause 1 ***** †Mr. President : Do you wish to say anything about this ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : The emphasis is on the abolition of the jurisdiction of the Privy Council, and obviously that emphasis could not be realised if the words “abolition of jurisdiction” were put in brackets. Mr. President : Do you wish to say anything about the 7th amendment ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, the acceding States were never subject to the jurisdiction of the Privy Council. But as a measure of extreme caution, it will be seen that in sub-clause (2) the words used are “within the territory of India”. Therefore, it is unnecessary to make any mention of the acceding States. Mr. President : I shall now put the amendments to vote. [All amendments were rejected. Clause 1 was added to the Bill.] The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That the Bill, as amended, be passed”. [The motion was adopted.] ***** *CAD, Vol. IX, 17th September 1949, p. 1612. †Ibid., p. 1613.

1047DRAFT CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 303— (contd.) ***** *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I move : “That after sub-clause (1) of clause (1) of article 303, the following sub-clauses be inserted, namely :— (II) “High Court” means any court which is deemed for the purposes of this Constitution to be a High Court for any State and includes— (i) any court in the territory of India constituted or reconstituted under this Constitution as a High Court and (ii) any other court in the territory of India which may be declared by Parliament by law to be a High Court for all or any of the purposes of this Constitution. (III) “Indian State” means— (i) as respects the period before the commencement of this Constitution, any territory which the Government of the dominion of India recognised as such a State; and (ii) as respects any period after the commencement of this Constitution, any territory not being part of the territory of India which the President recognises as being such a State.’ ” Mr. President : There is no amendment to this. As no one wishes to speak on this I will put it to vote. [The motion was adopted.] ***** †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I beg to move : “That after sub-clause (n) of clause (1) of article 303, the following sub-clause be inserted, namely : — “(nn) ‘Ruler’ in relation to a State for the time being specified in Part III of the First Schedule means the person who for the lime being is recognised by the President as the Ruler of the State and includes any person for the time being recognised by the President as exercising the powers of the Ruler of the State, and in relation to an Indian State means the Prime, Chief or other person recognised by the Government of the Dominion of India or the President as the Ruler of the State’.” ***** Mr. President : There is no amendment to this. I will put it to vote. [The amendment was adopted.] ‡The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : *CAD, Vol. IX, 17th September 1949, p. 1633. † Ibid., p. 1633. ‡ Ibid., pp. 1636-1637.