Vol. 13 · pages 576–580

Now my friend Mr. Saksena wants that instead of the 1st Jan. 1949 the date 1st January 1950 be substituted. Mr. Bhargava wants that for 31st March 1948, the date 31st March 1949 be substituted. Now having regard to what has already been done, it is not possible to accept either of these amendments. Mr. Saksena’s amendment, if I understood him correctly, has the object that there ought not to be a considerable time lag between the date on which the electoral roll is prepared and the date on which election is held. In other words, the electoral roll must not be very stale and out-of-date. Now it seems to me that if our election is going to take place in 1950, the electoral roll which is prepared on the basis of the voter’s qualification as his being an adult on 1st January 1949 cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be deemed to be a stale roll. My Friend Mr. Saksena must be aware of the fact that all electoral rolls generally lag behind the date of election by one year. Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena : It will become two years old ! The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Therefore if persons who are entitled to be voters in the electoral rolls on the basis of their single solitary qualification which we have, viz., his being a man of 21 years of age on the 1st January 1949 and if the election takes place in the year 1950 on some date not possible to prescribe, I think it cannot be said that the electoral roll will be a stale roll. Now I am coming to the amendment of Pandit Bhargava. He wants that the date of 31st March 1949 be substituted. It is not possible to accept that amendment because in the expectation of the election taking place in the year 1950, instructions were already issued to the various Provincial Governments on the 1st March 1948 to proceed to prepare the electoral rolls on the basis of adult suffrage. It seems to me that if we accept the amendment of Pandit Bhargava, we shall have to waste all the work that has already been done by Provincial Governments on that basis. I do not think there will be any waste of work already done, because all those who on the 1st January, 1948 would be adults, would be added on to the roll that has already been prepared. The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : Is it not necesary also to change the date 1st January 1949 to 31st March 1948, in subpara. (2) ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : No. I do not think so. Now, I come to the amendment of my friend Mr. Chaudhari. It seems to me that he is asking for something which is quite impossible, if 543DRAFT CONSTITUTION

not ridiculous. He says that every person who is of unsound mind should be deprived of his vote. We all agree that unsound persons should not be included in the voters’ list. But the question remains as to who is to determine whether a person is of unsound mind or not. It seems to me that unless the qualification which is introduced in this motion says that a person can be excluded from the electoral roll only when he has been adjudged to be of unsound mind by some impartial judicial authority, seems to be the soundest proposition. Otherwise, to give the authority to a village Patwari not to enter a certain person in the electoral roll because he thinks that he is of unsound mind is really to elevate a cabin boy to the position of the captain of a ship, and I think it is not possible to accept such an amendment. My friend Mr. Kamath raised some question with regard to a clause that was passed the other day, in which in addition to unsoundness of mind, certain other disqualifications were mentioned, particularly those relating to crime. Shri Deshhandhu Gupta : Will all the inmates of lunatic asylums be included in the electoral rolls, in the first instance ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I do not know the case of other provinces, but so far as Bombay is concerned, unless the Chief Presidency Magistrate declares a person to be of unsound mind no lunatic asylum would admit him. Mr. Vice-President: Yes, that is the case in Bengal. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : And it seems to be the case in Bengal also. It is there in the Lunacy Act. Now, with regard to the question of crime all that I need say is this that the Drafting Committee, in using the word ‘crime’ in that particular article was merely reproducing the provision contained in the Sixth Schedule of the Government of India Act, and I do not think that the Drafting Committee had anything more in mind than what is stated in that article. According to that article, the commission of a crime is not by itself any disqualification. The disqualification is only when a person is punished and detained in imprisonment. It is during the period of imprisonment that he loses the right to vote. That point can be further accommodated when we come to the additional disqualifications mentioned in the article to which Mr. Kamath referred. 544 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES

Shri H. V. Kamath : Am I to understand that grounds of crimes, corrupt or illegal practices etc. of which a person may be convicted in the past will not act as a disqualification or bar to his registration as a voter ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes, and those will be prescribed by Parliament. ***** Mr. Vice-President: I know that schoolboys on the eve of the vacation behave not always wisely. The next amendment is that of Pandit Thakur Dass Bhargava. The question is : “That for the words ‘files a declaration’ substitute the words ‘expresses the intention’.” But this is covered by what Dr. Ambedkar has accepted. Then his other amendment is that in paragraph 3, for the words “31st March 1948” substitute the words of 31st March 1949.” The amendment was negatived. ***** Mr. Vice-President: Then we come to the amendment of Mr. Nagappa. But that is covered by Dr. Ambedkar’s amendment and so it will not be put to vote. ***** Mr. Vice-President: The second part has been accepted by Dr. Ambedkar and therefore need not be voted on. Then we come to the third part. But that is also covered by Dr. Ambedkar’s amendment. But he has a further amendment to the effect. The question is : “That the word ‘permanently’ in the last line of sub-para, (4) be deleted.” The amendment was negatived. ***** Mr. Vice-President: Now, I put the Resolution, as amendment by Dr. Ambedkar’s amendments to vote. Does the House want me to read it out ? Honourable Members : No, no. Mr. Vice-President: So the question is : “That the Resolution as amended, be accepted.” * Resolved that instructions be issued forthwith to the authorities concerned for the preparation of electoral rolls and for taking all necessary steps so that elections 545DRAFT CONSTITUTION

to the Legislature under the new Constitution may be held as early as possible in the year 1950. Resolved further that the State electoral rolls he prepared on the basis of the provisions of the new Constitution agreed to by this Assembly and in accordance with the principles hereinafter mentioned, namely :— (1) That no person shall be included in the electoral roll of any area if he is of unsound mine and stands so declared by a competent court. (2) That 1st January 1949 shall be the date with reference to which the age of the electors is to be determined. (3) That a person shall not be qualified to be included in the electoral roll for any area unless he has resided in that area for a period of not less than 180 days in the year ending on the 31st March 1948. For the purposes of this paragraph, a person shall be deemed to be resident in any area if he ordinarily resides in that area or has a permanent place of residence therein. (4) That, notwithstanding anything in paragraph (3) above, a person who has migrated into a Province or according State on account of disturbances or fear of disturbances in his former place of residence shall be entitled to be included in the electoral roll of an area if he files or makes a declaration of his intention to reside permanently in that area. (Then motion, as amended was adopted.) [The motion, as amended, was adopted 5 amendments were rejected.] ***** ARTICLE 149 (Contd.) *Mr. Vice-President : Now we come to article 149. I think there has been sufficient discussion on this article and Dr. Ambedkar will now reply. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. Vice-President, Sir, in reply to the debate on article 149, I wish, first of all, to make clear my position with regard to my own amendment which was No. 2255. I want the permission of the House to withdraw this amendment; and in lieu of that I accept amendment No. 2249, as amended by amendment No. 48 of List II by Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad. I also accept amendments Nos. 62 and 66 of List IV by Shri T. T. Krishnamachari, amendment No. 2252 as modified by the amendment of Mr. Bhargava and amendment No. 2263 as modified by amendment No. 67 of Shri Shibban Lal Saksena, Now, Sir, so far as the general debate on the article is concerned, it seems to me that there are only two points that call for reply. The first point is with regard to the census figures to be adopted for the purpose of the new elections. A great deal of argument was concentrated *CAD, Vol. VII, 8th January 1949, pp. 1387-89. 546 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES

by many speakers on the fact that the census in certain provinces is not accurate and does not represent the true state of affairs so far as the relative proportions of the different communities are concerned. I think there is a great deal of force in such arguments and, if I may say so, there is enough testimony which one can collect from the Census Commissioners’ reports themselves to justify that criticism. I had intended to refer to the statements made by the Census Commissioners on this issue. But, as there is no time, I think I had better not refer to them. Further, the large majority of the members who have spoken on this subject know the facts better than I do. I only want to add one thing and that is that if any people have suffered most in the matter of these manipulations of census calculations by reason of political factors, they are the Scheduled Castes (Hear, Hear). In Punjab for instance, the other communities are trying to eat up the Scheduled Castes in order to augment their strength and to acquire larger representation in the legislature for themselves. These poor people who have been living mostly as landless labourers in villages scattered here and there, with no economic independence, with no support form the authorities,—the police or the magistracy,—have been, by certain powerful communities, either compelled to return themselves as members of that particular community or not to enumerate at the elections at all. The same thing has happened to a large extent, I know, in Bengal. For some reason which I have not been able to understand, a large majority of the Scheduled Castes there refused to return themselves as Scheduled Castes. That fact has been noted by the Census Commissioners themselves. I therefore completely appreciate the points that have been made by various members who spoke on the subject that it would not be fair to take the figures of that census. An Honourable Member : What about Assam ? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It may be true of Assam also. I am not very well acquainted with it. As I said I fully appreciate the point that to take those census figures and to delimit constituencies or allocate seats between the different constituencies and between the majority and minority communities would not be fair. Something will have to be done in order to see that the next election is a proper election, related properly to the population figures of the provinces as well as 547DRAFT CONSTITUTION