Vol. 14, Part II · pages 161–165

941 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL thing. It is said that a custom, to have the validity of a custom, must be ancient, must be moral, must be definite, etc. These are principles under which customs will be recognised in courts of law. I say it is wrong to say that, notwithstanding the validity of any established practice, we abrogate that because we have come to a different conclusion. What right have you to say so ? It is not that I am questioning the competence of this Parliament to go into this matter. I am only saying to my Hon. Friend, let him not force this law on the community. It may become a dead letter. Let the people come forward and ask for these reforms. I would like to have statistics as to how many persons have married under the Civil Marriages Act. We may call the people ignorant; after all, time will judge whether they are ignorant. Therefore, I would appeal to hon. Members not to jump before you are sure of the ground Let us have piece-meal legislations. We had the Widow Re-marriage Act. We had the Act to give women the power to inherit property. We had the Act to restrain child marriages and so on. Therefore, I say, let us wait and see. Let us go slow. Noting will be lost thereby. Nothing will be lost because we do not allow divorce. Allow it to those who want a divorce. Let those who have solemised their marriages under the civil authority, to jointly make a declaration that they will be governed by the Civil Marriage Act. If there is a volume of opinion against a measure, let us try to change that volume of opinion. Let hon. Members consider the question coolly and deliberately. Let us not displace the existing system merely because something is novel or strange so that you may go with the rest of the universe. We understand what is meant by Christianity. Germany is a Christian country, but were there no fightings in Germany ? Do not Christians fight with each other ? How can we say that because of castes and creeds in our country the nation went down to the Greeks ? Why give a platform and a point to every other man to abuse us ? We have progressed, and progressed considerably. In Switzerland, they say no woman has a vote. Then why not our women go there and ask them to demand votes ? There is no use giving a lurid picture of our society and of our women. Our women have produced Sitas and Savitris. They followed their husbands. Perhaps we have now to follow our wives. Let them write our Puranas and say that men should follow their wives, if that would bring domestic peace. To-day we are husband and wife. To-morrow I go to a cinema and see a woman well made 4 p.m.

942 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES up with powered face and all that. Am I to come home and beat my wife, just because she is not as pretty as the one I saw in the picture ? And the next day, am I to apply for a divorce ? No. Woman is the weaker sex. Perhaps they may quarrel with me for saying so. But you cannot get rid of these institutions unless you pray to God to have only women in the world or only men. These institutions are very necessary. They are necessary for the proper balancing of domestic life. They are necessary in the interest of economy in the interest of solidarity and in the interest of avoiding unemployment and in so many other interests. If the husband dies, there is the brother-in-law to take care of the widow. We have also the maintenance laws to give at least a temporary strength to the widow, to stand by herself. I am only opposing those ladies who want to take away a chunk of their father’s property and leave the husband alone. May God save us from them and from having an army of unmarried women. Shri T. N. Singh (Uttar Pradesh) : Sir, I have an amendment in my name. Mr. Speaker : All those who have tabled amendments and others also will get a chance. *Shri Raj Bahadur : I have listened very patiently to the speeches of the hon. Members who have spoken before me, although I raised certain pertinent questions for them to throw light upon. [I find myself in complete agreement with the provisions of this Bill.] And my support is based not on any misplaced ethusiasm or the rashness of youth, but because I feel that this measure is necessary because of the exigencies of the moment and the situation created by the attainment of independence by our country. I feel that unless we have a measure of this kind and keep peace with the times, we are bound to fail. It is well known that perhaps during the last three years no other Bill or legislative measure has provoked so much controversy as the Hindu Code Bill, and passion, prejudice, sentiment and superstition have all come in to cloud our judgments. It is a little difficult in an atmosphere so surcharged with superstiton and suspicion for the country and also for this House to come to a balanced conclusion, a balanced judgment on the merits and demerits of the Bill. The critics of the measure can be divided into three categories. First of all there are the people who like the Hon. Deputy-Speaker genuinely and sincerely feel that we are definitely marching ahead * P.D., Vol. VIII. Part II, 7th February 1951, pp. 2532-36.

943 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL of the time and the adoption of a measure of this kind would do us harm, that it would harm Hindu society which would be irreparable. Then there are others who day in and day out criticise those who are responsible for this measure, and to them what matters is not what is being said, but who says it. These people have clouded the judgments of the masses also. It is well known that our masses are ignorant and they are tossed violently between these two extremes. It is also well known that when a country attains Independence, there is a natural desire felt by the people to have uniform laws and to codify their existing laws. This has synchronised with national awakening. This is not the first time that such a desire has been expressed by the Indian people, through their representatives in the Legislature. As early as 1921 there was a resolution to that effect by a Member from the Central Provinces. Shri K. J. Bagde and Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru was the then Law Member. The resolution was to the effect that all the various branches of the Hindu Law as then existing should be properly codified. From time to time this question was also raised in the Central Legislature and I find that as eminent a person as Shri Ganganath Jha has put a question on the floor of the House asking when the codification of Hindu Law would take place. We may note that that was also a period of national awakening and this desire to codify the law was being voiced at that time. The option has been expressed that this Code should be made applicable to non-Hindus also, to Christians and Muslims and others also that there should be a common Civil Code. Articles in the Constitution have been referred to and it has been said that this Code violates some of those articles. But I am sure when the Civil Code comes up for consideration, these very same persons would come forward to say that this Civil Code violates article 44 which guarantees the liberty of thought or religion. That will be the objection raised, of that I have no doubt in my mind. The demand for a Civil Code, seems to be bogus and without any meaning. If we apply our minds to the present condition of Hindu society we will find that there are various differences and divisions in various matters, in the matter of marriage, of adoption, of succession and soon. It is impossible for the country to make any progress unless there is some codification of these various laws. So far as other sections of society are concerned they have this in some measure. For instance, Christian and Muslim women have some rights and privileges which.

944 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES are sought to be given to Hindu women by this Code. Christian and Muslim women are now entitled in some measure to the right of inheritance. In the case of Muslim women, divorce is also obtainable to them. An Hon. Member : No. Shri Tyagi : It is not a right but a liability. Shri Raj Bahadur : You may call it a liability but I would request you to apply your mind to the provisions of the Bill. There are many instances where a Hindu has deserted his wife for more than five years. Hindus have changed their religion and there are instances where Hindus keep other women while their first spouse is living. In such cases of immorality will you not come out with your galantry or chivalry and allow divorce to such miserable Hindu sisters ? The right has been given to a Hindu male to marry four or five times. If the sanctity of marriage is there it should be for both man and woman. If a woman is expected to be pure, chaste and faithful to the husband, is it not for the man also to bind himself by the same obligation ? Why should it be one-sided. If we say that man is God’s favourite creature, it will not help our society or country in any way. Let us look at it from another angle. In the present state of the world whenever there is a threat to the frontiers of a country and there is a war, it is not fought on the old lines. It is a total war. In the last great war while British men went to the trenches and the firing line, British women folk applied themselves to the various tasks of national responsibility. For example, they ran railways, worked on the buses and in ammunition factories. Unfortunately it is a fact that we regard woman as a liability, as something which is below ourselves. The common man’s conception of a woman is that she is like the shoes on our feet. If they are torn we can throw them away and take a new pair. An Hon. Member : Is that the conception in Rajasthan ? Shri Raj Bahadur : That is so not only in Rajasthan but in most of our rural areas. It is so in high families also. It is time that we realise the bitter truth. It is time that we recognise it if we want to shoulder the responsibilities that have devolved upon us as a result of our independence. If we want to make our home and this country Bharat Varsh secure we should have to see that our women folk are brought on a par with man. It is not Westernism or Modernism but the exigencies of the moment that require it. You cannot face all the threats to your security as a nation unless you radically change our

945 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL attitude towards the women of our country. It is impossible to go ahead with the task of reorganisation of our country unless and until our women get the same status as man in our society and it is a patent fact that today that status is not granted to them. Unless and until the law that is there is codified and brought within the reach of the common man it will be impossible for our people to be unified. May I in this connection refer in passing to the difficulties that we are experiencing today ? Our law has been what the British Judges in the Privy Council have interpreted till now. It is a well known fact that conflicting judgments exist on the same points. For example you can cite many contradictory rulings on either side. Apart from that the law as it exists today is only within the reach of experts, lawyers or judges and the common man does not know what the law is. Is it not good that by codifying the law and making it more rational by modifying it to the extent desirable, we may make the law within easy reach of the people ? Otherwise our progress towards unification and solidarity will be impossible. The question before us is not whether we should codify. Even the bitterest opponents of codification have veered round to the opinion that codification is necessary. How far should we codify it, is the question. There are only three or four points which have aroused bitter controversy……. An Hon. Member : This is not a general discussion. Shri Raj Bahadur : It is a discussion on the points hon. Members have made that the whole Code should be made applicable to the entire nation. Bitter controversy has raged firstly about divorce and marriage laws and secondly about inheritance. I will confine myself to these two important points. I would say that the provisions of the Bill and the latest amendments proposed by the Hon. Law Minister may be modified to a certain extent, if we find that we cannot go whole hog. But so far as the basic principle of divorce is concerned we shall have to recognise it. I might give you an example. If a man happens to convert himself to Islam or any other religion, at the present time his wife and children are also compelled to do so. Is it not necessary that at least in such cases our women folk should be allowed to remain within the Hindu fold ? Can anybody object in principle to divorce being allowed in such cases ?