Vol. 13 · pages 411–415

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I have already given notice of an amendment to the original article. In view of the amendment of Dr. Ambedkar, there should be consequential changes. Mr. Vice-President : All right. ***** *Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I am very glad for the kind interruption. It does not remove my difficulties at all. Does it mean to say that the State ‘makes’ a custom or usage ? Still you have the difficulty to face that the State has to make a law including custom or usage. The Honourable Shri B. G. Kher : Of course, it means ‘ whenever necessary’. That is always understood in law. I am sorry to interrupt. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Probably he may not find it necessary to continue his speech if I refer to him this fact, namely, that the expression “law” in (3) (a) has reference to law in 8 (1). Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I am again grateful for the kind interruption of Dr. Ambedkar that the words ‘custom and usage’ have the force of law and so forth.... ***** †Mr. Vice-President : Shall we resume discussion of article 8 ? Is there any Honourable Member who wishes to speak on it ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Bombay : General) : Mr. Vice-President, the amendment of Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad, I think, creates some difficulty which it is necessary to clear up. His amendment was intended to remove what he called an absurdity of the position which is created by the Draft as it stands. His argument, if I have understood it correctly, means this, that in the definition of law we have included custom, and having included custom, we also speak of the State not having the power to make any law. According to him, it means that the State would have the power to make custom, because according to our definition, law includes custom. I should have thought that that construction was not possible, for the simple reason, that sub-clause (3) of article 8 applies to the whole of the article 8, and does not merely apply to sub-clause (2) of article 8. That being so, the only proper construction that one can put or it is possible to put would be to read the word ‘Law’ distributively, so that so far as article 8, sub-clause (1) was concerned, ‘Law’ would include custom, while sofar as sub-clause (2) was concerned, ‘Law’ would not include custom. *CAD. Vol. VII, 26th November 1948. p. 642. †Ibid., VII. 29th November 1948, pp. 644-45. 378 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES

That would be, in my judgment, the proper reading, and if it was read that way, the absurdity to which my Friend referred would not arise. But I can quite understand that a person who is not properly instructed in the rules of interpretation of Statute may put the construction which my Friend Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad is seeking to put, and therefore to avoid this difficulty, with your permission, I would suggest that in the amendment which I have moved to sub-clause (3) of article 8, I may be permitted to add the following words after the words “In this article”. The words which I would like to add would be— “Unless the context otherwise requires” so that the article would read this way— ‘In this article, unless the context otherwise requires— (a) The expression ‘law’ includes any Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom, or usage having the force of law in the territory of India or any part thereof; (b) the expression ………..’ ” I need not read the whole thing. So, if the context in article 8 (1) requires the term ‘law’ to be used so as to include custom, that construction would be possible. If in subclause (2) of article 8, it is not necessary in the context to read the word ‘law’ to include custom, it would not be possible to read the word ‘law’ to include custom. I think that would remove the difficulty which my Friend has pointed out in his amendment. Mr. Vice-President : I shall put the amendments, one by one, to vote. I am referring to the numbering of the amendments in the old list.... I put amendment No. 252, standing in the name of Mr. Mahboob Ali Baig to vote. The question is : “That the proviso to clause (2) of article 8 he deleted.” The amendment was adopted. [Amendment No. 259, standing in the name of Shri Lokanath Misra was negatived.] ***** *Mr. Vice-President : Then I put amendment No. 260, as amended by Dr. Ambedkar. The question is : “That for clause (3) of article 8, the following be substituted:— * (3) In this article, unless the context otherwise requires, (a) The expression ‘law’ includes any Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom, or usage having the force of law in the territory of India or any part thereof; *CAD, Vol. VII, 26th November 1948, p. 645. 379DRAFT CONSTITUTION

(b) the expression ‘laws in force’ includes laws passed or made by a Legislature or other competent authority in the territory of India before the commencement of this Constitution and not previously repeated, notwithstanding that any such law or any part thereof may not he then in operation either at all or in particular areas ‘” The amendment was adopted. [Two more amendments were negatived.] Article 8. as amended was added to the Constitution. ARTICLE 8-A ***** *Mr. Vice-President : The next amendment is No. 273 in the new list in the name of Mr. L. N. Misra. Shri Loknath Misra (Orissa : General) : Sir, I beg to move : “That after article S, the following new article 8-A he inserted : Right op Suffrage and Election 8-A. (1) livery citizen who is not less than 21 years of age and is not otherwise disqualified under this Constitution or any law made by the Union Parliament or by the Legislature of his State on any ground, e.g., non-residence, unsoundness of mind, crime or corrupt or illegal practice, shall be entitled to be registered as a voter at such elections. (2) The elections shall be on the basis of adult suffrage as described in the next preceding sub-clause hut they may be indirect, i.e., the Poura and Grama Punehayats or a group of villages, a township or a part of it having a particular number of voters or being an autonomous unit of local self-government shall he required to elect primary members, who in their turn, shall elect members to the Union Parliament and lo the State Assembly. (3) The Primary Members shall have the right to recall the member they elected Lo the Parliament or the Assembly of the State. (4) A voter shall have the right to election and the cost of election shall be met by the State. (5) Every candidate will be elected by the People and even if there is no rival, no candidate shall be elected unless he gels at least ½ of the total votes.” ***** †Shri Algu Rai Shastri (United Provinces : General) : Mr. President‡ I rise to oppose the amendment moved by my Friend. My first reason for doing so is that it has no relation to the question raised here. Matters relating lo elections have been dealt with in the Draft Constitution at other places where it has been staled as to how the Legislature shall be formed ; who shall be the members of the Legislatures ; what shall be their rights ; what shall be the procedure of their elections. Amendments of this nature may be moved in the article dealing with such things. This amendment is totally irrelevant lo Fundamental Rights of the Draft Constitution.... *CAD, Vol. VII. 29th November 1948. p. 646. †Ibid., 646. ‡Translation of Hindustani .speech. 380 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES

...This amendment should be rejected outright and should never be accepted. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I cannot accept this amendment. The motion of Loknath Misra was negatived. ARTICLE 9 ***** *Mr. Vice-President : Amendment No. 313 is disallowed as being verbal. Amendment No. 314. Dr. Ambedkar. Shri H. V. Kamath : Mr. Vice-President, Sir, may I ask whether this is merely a verbal or at best a formal amendment liable to be disallowed ? It merely seeks to substitute the words ‘State funds’ in place of the words ‘the revenues of the State’. Mr. Vice-President : I shall keep that in mind. Dr. Ambedkar, will you please deal with that point also ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That in sub-clause (b) of the second paragraph of clause (1) of article 9, for the words ‘the revenues of the State’ the words ‘State funds’ he substituted.” The reason why the Drafting Committee felt that the words “the revenues of the State” should be replaced by the words “State funds” is a very simple tiling. In the administrative parlance which has been in vogue in India for a considerably long time, we are accustomed to speak of revenues of a Provincial Government or revenues of the Central Government. When we come to speak of local boards or district boards, we generally use the phrase local funds and not revenues. That is the terminology which has been in operation throughout India in all the provinces. Now, the Honourable members of the House will remember that we are using the word ‘State’ in this Part to include not only the Central Government and the Provincial Governments and Indian States, but also local authorities, such as district local boards or taluka local boards or the Port Trust authorities. So far as they are concerned, the proper word is ‘Fund’. It is therefore, desirable, in view of the fact that we are making these Fundamental Rights obligatory not merely upon the Central Government and the Provincial Governments, but also upon the district local boards and taluka local boards, to use a wider *CAD, Vol. VII. 96th November 1948. pp. 653-34. 381DRAFT CONSTITUTION

phraseology which would be applicable not only to the Central Government, but also to the local boards which are included in the definition of the word ‘State’. I hope that my Honourable Friend Mr. Kamath will now understand that the amendment which I have moved is not merely verbal, but has some substance in it. Sir, I move. ***** *(One or two honourable Members rose to speak.) Mr. Vice-President : You must forgive me if I am unable to meet the wishes of Honourable Members. I want the full co-operation of the House and I ask it specially just now. Dr. Ambedkar. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, dealing with the amendments which have been moved, I accept Amendment No. 280 moved by Mr. Rouf. Shri Syamanandan Sahaya (Bihar : General): Will the Honourable Member give his views also about amendments which have not been moved ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I am very sorry I cannot give opinions regarding amendments which have not been moved. Shri Syamanandan Sahaya : It was no fault of the member concerned. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I cannot help it. I accept the amendment of Mr. Rouf adding the words “place of birth”. I also accept the amendment (No. 37 in List I) by Mr. Subramaniam to amendment No. 276 dropping the words “In particular” in clause (1) of article 9. With regard to amendment No. 303 moved by Mr. Guptanath Singh. I am prepared to accept his amendment provided he is prepared to drop the word “kunds” from his amendment. Shri Guptanath Singh: I have already done that, Sir. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Then, among the many amendments which I am sorry I cannot accept. I think it is necessary for me to say something about two of them. One is amendment No. 315 moved by Mr. Tahir which requires that any contravention of the provisions contained in article 9 should be made a crime punishable by law. My friend Mr. Tahir who moved this amendment referred *CAD, Vol. VII, 29th November 1948, p.p. 660-64. 382 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES