Vol. 14, Part I · pages 601–605

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 583 take the Hindus out of their Indian moorings and to launch them on foreign waters of Arabia and Jerusalem. Where is the necessity for this Hindu Code ? Why don’t you extend the provisions of the Indian Succession Act of 1925 by a stroke of the pen to the entire Hindu community ? By this very convenient and simplified method—and we are very much enamoured of simple legislation—it will be very easy to provide for the entire Hindu society. Before I conclude, I think it is my duty, and an honest duty, to sound a note of warning. You very well know that the Hindu law is a law not piloted from outside. It is not an imposition from above, it is not the creation of a sovereign power, it is not the result of a ukase of any king or of any legislature. That is the greatest merit about it. It is a spontaneous development from centuries past. The texts of the Smritis and The Nibhandhaka have not created the laws; they have only explained and elucidated the accepted principles of Hindu Law, but those principles as readable from the texts have never been the governing force of the Hindu society. The governing force of the Hindu society has been a consistently developing usage and custom governing the different sections of the society. That development was spontaneous. In fact, looking at it from a realistic point of view, the Hindu society is a working legislature in continuous session not of the few selected persons as this House is but a legislature of the entire community, that modifies and moulds its law according to its requirements. That is the supreme beauty of Hindu Law. And that you are distorting, that you are deforming by this piece of legisaltion by taking from it vitality, elasticity, mobility, spontaniety and adaptability to the everchanging circumstances of the society. Sir, I, as an humble Member of this House, have a duty to say that you must be very careful before you tamper with it. It is a law that has come into existence as a result of centuries of development and before you tamper with its time-honoured institutions, customs and usages, you should keep one thing in mind. The India of ours does not reside in urban towns like Allahabad and Delhi. The real India lives in the five lakhs of villages. The life of the villagers is so intimately interwoven with the texture of their society that whatever modifications you might make by this piece of legislation, they will resist to the limit of their might before you take away from them the time-honoured usage and customs to which they have been submitting as a matter of course for centuries. Without doing any benefit to the Hindu Society,

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES584 you will be opening the door for a few disgruntled persons who want to take advantage of this innovated piece of legislation. Dr. Mono Mohan Das (West Bengal); Is he not casting aspersions on some of the members of this House ? He has repeated the same thing so many times. Pandit Mukut Bihari Lal Bhargava : I have not referred to any Members of this House. My hon. friend should have the patience and the tolerance to hear the opposite views. My submission is that you cannot put a brake to this spontaneous growth and development of Hindu law by this piece of legislation and if you pass it, you will be spoiling the beauty of Hindu law rather than adding to it. This piece of legislation is so disastrous in its character and so destructive in its nature that it is difficult to imagine the bringing of a constructive approach to bear upon it. The Hon. Prime Minister and Leader of the House suggested the other day that we should meet in a formal or informal committee to devise a compromise upon which the orthodox and unorthodox sections can agree. I join issue with him. But I feel that the Bill has been conceived with a mental outlook and psychology which is wholly repugnant and unacceptable to Hindu ideology. Consequently, in spite of our sincere efforts to arrive at a constructive approach of this measure, it will be very difficult to do so. The safest course for the Government to adopt is to withhold this measure and wait for a more opportune time for a legislature elected on adult franchise with a mandate from the electorate to change the entire structure of the Hindu society. Until and unless there is such a mandate, I submit, and I question and question with vehemence the propriety of this legislature to deal with a measure of this vital importance to the Hindu society. With these words, Sir, I resume my seat. Shri Loknath Misra (Orissa : General) : On a point of order. Although I do not desire to oppose the consideration of this Bill, I think its consideration is totally barred and bolted by the very Constitution which we have recently passed. Of course, it may be argued that it has not yet come into force. But we are quite sure that we are not going to pass this Bill this time and by the time the Bill is passed the Constitution must have come into force. If you will permit me, I will detail my reasons for saying that this Bill is against the Constitution.

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 585 Mr. Deputy Speaker : I have heard the point of order sufficiently. The new Constitution has not yet been implemented. It has not come into force. I do not propose to give any ruling on the question as to whether it will stand in the way of this Bill being passed into law if it comes into force. Under the present Constitution, this House is thoroughly competent to get on with this Bill. Shri T. T. Krishnamachari (Madras : General) : In view of the importance of this measure and the fact that the number of people who want to speak is large, would the Chair consider the desirability of using its discretion and imposing a time-limit ? Some Honourable Members : No, no. Some Honourable Members : Yes, yes. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Order, order. Shri M. Tirumala Rao (Madras : General): This point was raised by Mr. Sidhva and disposed of by you. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Mr. Sidhva raised another point. He wanted to know if this House would continue the discussion tomorrow and what length of time has been allotted. It is an official Bill and it is, for Government to allot the number of days, I replied. The position is that the Speaker can only say whether debate on a particular Bill has been sufficient or not. So far as this Bill is concerned, hon. Members are fully aware that no timelimit can be imposed. ( Hear, hear ). Hon. Member will kindly wait and see. The general discussion on this Bill was begun so early as 24th February 1949. It continued on the 25th, 26th, 28th, 1st March, 1st April and 2nd April. One hon. Member took six hours and eight minutes. We spent in all 6 days, 9 hours and 20 minutes. All the same, only 14 hon. Members have spoken so far. The last speaker who has just concluded, Pandit Mukut Bihari Lal Bhargava, started at 315 p.m. on 2-4-49 and went on till 5 that day—one and a three-quarter hours. Today he went on from 11-50 to 12-57. At this rate, we will have to sit nearly a year if all hon. Members are to have a chance to speak. Many of the points which have been made in the speeches are all very enlightening. I say nothing against the speeches. But, I have received a large number of requests from hon. Members for opportunities to speak. Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra (West Bengal: General): We are all in so much darkness. We want light from every side. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Light from every side is coming, but if we proceed at this rate, light from many sides would not come.

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES586 Therefore, I would request hon. Members to limit their speeches, as far as possible, to half an hour. On all Resolutions fifteen minutes are placed at the disposal of hon. Members and they are able to put their cases perfectly well within that time. I have given twice as much time. But I do not insist upon it. It is simply my suggestion to the House. Otherwise, if a closure is applied tomorrow, possibly by that time a number of Members may have spoken and sometimes wittingly or unwittingly if the House is in favour of closure, it has to be accepted. I am giving a warning in advance. The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam (Minister of State for Transport and Railways) : I only want to say that I hope to finish before the timelimit fixed by you. I hope you will permit me to proceed in the afternoon. Mr. Deputy Speaker : It ought not to be said ahead. I am leaving it to hon. Members to decide, so that all Members may have equal opportunities. Normally, half an hour is the time-limit I suggest. If the House agrees. Some Honourable Members : Agreed. Some Honourable Members : No, no. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Order, order, Mr. Sahu wants to say something. Shri Lakshminarayan Sahu (Orissa : General) : Sir, I would like to know if priority for speaking will be given to those Members who are willing to restrict their speches to only five, seven or ten minutes. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Therefore, if I have to accept that suggestion, I hope hon. Members will also indicate in their letters to me how many minutes they are likely to take and I will ring the bell as soon as that minute is over. Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra : Before you adjourn, I want to say just one thing. You said just now that it will be perfectly open to Members to move closure. But according to all parliamentary procedure, it is open to the Speaker to say whether there has been sufficient debate or not and whether the closure is justified or not. that is a well established practice and you also reiterated that you follow that. In view of that statement, do you say beforehand, even today, that you will have to accept closure tomorrow?

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 587 Mr. Deputy Speaker : The Chair has no right to make up its mind in advance. It is now 1 o’clock and the House stands adjourned till 2-30 p.m. The Assembly then adjourned for Lunch till Half Past two of the Clock. The Assembly re-assembled at Half Past Two of the Clock, Mr. Deputy Speaker (Shri M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar) in the Chair. HINDU CODE —Contd. The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : Sir, I rise to offer my wholehearted support to the Hindu Code as it has emerged from the Select Committee. Sir, I have been watching the progress of this lawmaking from its earliest beginnings. I had the privilege of tendering evidence before the Rau Committee and since it has emerged from that Committee it has undergone many changes and, in my view, steady improvement. Sir, I feel that this Hindu Code is merely a continuation, in the social sphere, of the great Constitution we have completed the other day in our capacity as a constitution-making body. Sir, what are the basic factors of that Constitution ? It is based on the unification, on the integration and on the strengthening of India as one political entity. Similarly this Bill is based on the principles of unification, integration and strengthening of the Hindu community. Sir, unless the Hindu community is unified, integrated and strengthened, I do not see how the great Constitution we have made can be successfully worked. Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra : Unified by divorce ? The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : The idea that politically you can be well-advanced, that in the field of economics you can preach socialism, but yet be a believer in social stagnation is wholly incompatible and unrealistic. India has to move on all fronts, or not at all and I think the change and reform in the social sphere is as indispensable as our progress in the political and economic spheres. Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra : Democracy in marriage also ? The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : My hon. friends may well ask why we should not compile a code for the whole country rather than a unified code for the Hindu community alone. Well, Sir, while