Vol. 14, Part I · pages 516–520

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES498 Mr. Deputy Speaker : I request that the challenge need not be accepted on the floor of the House ! Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : He will not find it safe to challenge me outside the House. Mr. Tajamul Husain : You did not like us to interrupt and therefore I want your permission first to seek a point of information. The point I want to know from my honourable friend is that today is the 1st of April. Is that the reason why he is taking up the whole day on this Bill ? Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : That question should be addressed to the Honourable Law Minister for bringing the motion on the All Fools Day ! Mr. Deputy Speaker : Whether it applies to anyone or not let the honourable Member proceed with his speech. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Then we come to the next clause of Part II of the original Bill. Dr. Mono Mohan Das (West Bengal : General): Sir, it appears the honourable Member is not prepared. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I could not catch the honourable doctor. Mr. Deputy Speaker : He may go on. I hope he will conclude his speech at least today. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I do not know. Mr. Deputy Speaker : I would only say that enough has been said so far on this point about changes of substance. After all it is not the honourable Minister in charge of the Bill who alone need be satisfied. He holds his point of view. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : The House will decide. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Yes, the House will decide it ultimately. Therefore the honourable Member need not take further time in driving it home to one individual Member however important he may be. He may try to carry the House with him. As I have already said, enough has been said in regard to the matter of substantial changes. I thought he was going to refer to other matters of substance like marriage, divorce, adoption. I do not think the honourable Minister would be dogmatic and I am sure that though in respect of this he may have strong views he would like to wait and see how far there are arguments on the other side, and he may be convinced. I thought the honourable Member would come to matters of substance. A long time has been spent on this point already.

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 499 Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I must frankly express my gratefulness to the Law Minister for listening to me so patiently. I submit that I have other points indicating changes which I shall show briefly. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Leave along the changes. There are changes I may put it this way. I am not letting down a secret and there is no secret from the House as I conceive. When a matter comes before the House after having been referred to Select Committee, the Select Committee might commit a mistake and it is open to the Members to say that it is wrong and the wrong has to be corrected. Except one or two matters as for example what each member said in the Select Committee which ought not to be placed before the House as things are in a fluid condition and it would result in a disturbance and antipathy. I may say this. So far as the Select Committee is concerned any draft may be considered. The draft was of the Ministry here. At the outset it is said in Para. 2 of the Select Committee’s report here: “The draft Hindu Code, as introduced in the Legislature, did not receive any Departmental scrutiny prior to its introduction, and the Ministry of Law ( which certainly includes the Minister of Law at its head ), which had an opportunity to examine the Bill during the period between the end of the last session of the legislature and the beginning of the present session, have now produced a revised draft……..” The draft was placed before the Select Committee and the ruling of the Speaker is that the original Bill that was sent to the Select Committee, along with the draft—which we will assume is the complete list of all the amendments which the Law Minister wanted to introduce—was all considered by the Select Committee. It is open to the honourable member to say that the Bill and the clauses in it are wrong, that they upset society and that sufficient attention was not paid to the changes that were effected in the Select Committee to the original Bill. I think that would help the House to come to a conclusion regarding either the whole Bill or individual clauses in it on matters of substance. We have already spent a lot of time over this matter. It is necessary that on this matter there may be clarification and I do not think anyone here wants to dogmatise upon a particular matter. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I might say openly that I have not an empty mind but I have an open mind. Mr. Deputy Speaker : That is what we expect. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I am very grateful to him. Sir I come to another branch of the Bill. I would like to draw the attention of

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES500 the House to clause 102 of the Departmental Bill which corresponds to clause 101 of the final Bill. This was introduced for the first time by the Departmental Bill. The Select Committee made some changes, but the Departmental Committee had introduced a serious change. It is provided in the Departmental Bill that if there was a male and a female in the same line, the male shall take double of the female. In the final Bill their shares are made equal. As regards the justice of the final Bill, it does not matter, but I submit this new introduction is a departure. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Even if there are, say, 100 departures, is it necessary to exhaust all the 100 departures ? Only some ten or fifteen— even these are many—by way of illustration will be enough. He may take a few departures and say that for these reasons the matter should be sent back to the Select Committee or sent round for eliciting public opinion. I thought the honourable Member concluded that portion referring to various items where there is a departure. There are departures and the list which has been circulated contains a list of departures extending over thirteen pages, though it does not state how the departures have been made. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Departures have not been noted. Mr. Deputy Speaker : True, they have not been noted in the manner of departures. It is admitted there are departures but only some important items may be taken for the purpose of showing that on account of these departures the Bill should be sent to the Select Committee or to another Select Committee or that it must go round the country for opinion. I think we are taking too much time on this. Shri B. Das : Sir, I said that all along. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I can quite appreciate the exasperation of one or two Members. Shri B. Das : Sir, he is using the same word ! Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Sir, I draw attention of the House to clause 103 of the Departmental Bill which corresponds to clause 102............. Mr. Deputy Speaker : I have already pointed out with reference to this. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : This is an important matter. Mr. Deputy Speaker : I can only suggest to the honourable Member. I cannot argue for him. I can only say that instances need

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 501 not be multiplied. According to him there are a sufficient number of instances, but if he thinks he has forgotten one point which is more important than others then he may point it out. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Clause 103 of the Departmental Bill corresponding to clause 102 of the final Bill restricts the agnates to five degrees. The change restricts the heirship to five degrees only. In case there are no enumerated heirs, then according to the Hindu Law the property will go to the agnate, but the definition of agnate has been seriously curtailed and reduced to five degrees. In the next clause, clause 104 of the Departmental Bill corresponding to clause 103 of the final Bill, cognates are also similarly restricted to five degrees. This is a serious departure from the conception of the Hindu Law and from the original Bill. Any agnate, however distantly connected, would be an heir in the absence of preferential heirs. With regard to cognates also, in the absence of agnates any cognates, however distantly connected, would be heirs. So, with regard to cognates the change is entirely new. With regard to agnates it is a serious departure from the original clauses. They merely described that in the absence of enumerated heirs they go to agnates, and in the absence of agnates they go to cognates. Mr. Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Cognates or agnates ? Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Cognates. I submit these are serious changes. According to Dr. Ambedkar these are not serious because he has made the changes. Shrimati G. Durgabai : Serious and substantial changes ! Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Substantial if you like. I think thay are not merely substantial but also serious. Serious goes a degree further. In fact, this restricts the right of heirship of certain people. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Is the honourable Member not closing at five ? Enough has been said on this topic. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : No, Sir. Not enough to convince some of the Members. I want to absolutely convince them. Shri Khurshed Lal : Then you will have to argue till doomsday. Mr. Deputy Speaker : If he has not been able to convince for five hours now, he will not be able to convince him at the end of another five hours. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : The Honourable the Law Minister has though not a vacant mind, an open mind and he will in the long run be convinced.

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES502 An Honourable Member : He will ponder over your speech tonight. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Clause 10 of the original has been entirely omitted in the Departmental Bill—absolutely forgotten. In fact in the Hindu law, as in the Muslim law, in the absence of enumerated heirs, in the absence of agnates, cognates other unrelated heirs succeed. They are the preceptors, acharyas, shishyas and sahabrahmacharis and pupils under the same tutor, are the heirs. According to the Departmental Bill, the respect for acharya, respect for sahabrahmachari and consideration for them is entirely thrown overboard. This again is a serious change. The cumulative weight of these serious changes as well as many numerous others will I hope succeed in ultimately winning over the Minister of Law to my side. Then we come to clause 109 of the Departmental Bill and 108 of the final Bill. This provision is absolutely new. In that clause some new heirs have been introduced which were not in the original Bill. With regard to succession to stridhan, some changes have been made. And then in Part II, clause 14, where heirs stay together Mr. Deputy Speaker : If the honourable Member is likely to 5 P. M. conclude soon, we will stay on for a few minutes more. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : No, Sir. Shrimati G. Durgabai : We will stay on for five minutes more, if the honourable Member will conclude. Mr. Deputy Speaker : I shall leave it to the speaker. The House now stands adjourned to 10-45 a.m. tomorrow. The Assembly then adjourned till a Quarter to Eleven of the Clock Saturday the 2nd April, 1949.