Vol. 14, Part II · pages 301–305

1081 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Mr. Deputy Speaker : Hon. Members are entitled to speak on both sides. Dr. Deshmukh (Madhya Pradesh): After all, clause 2 does not make any distinction between different portions of the Code as it has been placed before us. If my hon. friend does not say at the present stage all that he wants to say with respect to the other Chapters, he will be precluded from saying them later, because clause 2 is of general application to the whole Code and does not refer merely to marriage and divorce. Once clause 2 is accepted, it will apply to the whole Code and unless we have an amendment saying that it applies to marriage and divorce only—and no such amendment is before us from Government—I think the hon. Member cannot be stopped from bringing in other Chapters. Shri J. R. Kapoor (Uttar Pradesh) : Even if clause 2 is passed in this form or an amended from, it will not preclude any one from saying at any subsequent stage that any particular portion or Chapter shall not be applicable to this section of the community or that. Take for instance the question of succession and inheritance. When that Chapter is taken up, it will certainly be open to us to add a clause to the effect that this part of the Code shall not be applicable to Sikhs or this or that community. The passing of clause 2 would leave the door open to discuss the matter later on and it may be advisable for all of us, if we are agreed on the marriage and divorce laws subject to such amendments as may be acceptable, to proceed with the Bill. Mr. Deputy Speaker : I am in a fix. I thought I would be able to ask hon. Members to conclude the debate on this matter having regard to the statement by the Hon. the Prime Minister that the Chapter on marriage and divorce only will be taken up. He said so particularly. Now, if clause 2 is to apply to all the other Chapters I do not know how I can ask the hon. Members not to refer to them. That is my fear. I would like elucidation from the Hon. the Law Minister. Otherwise the scope will become wider and it would not be reasonable for me to say that the debate shall be concluded so early. Dr. Ambedkar : The Hon. the Prime Minister stated the other day that the House will rise on the 6th. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : That is only provisional. Dr. Ambedkar : Whatever it may be, it is there. I think I can say without giving away the position of the Government that it is quite clear that it would not be possible to proceed in this session beyond the

1082 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Chapter dealing with marriage and divorce. When we reach the end of that Chapter. I propose to move certain amendments to these two parts in order to make them self-contained and to attach to them certain Schedules which go with marriage and divorce. I think the House may well take it that that is the intention of Government so far as the present session is concerned. When, for instance, the other parts are taken up, no doubt any Law Minister who would be then piloting the Bill and the Draftsmen would see to it that those parts were also self contained and the same definition and rules as regards applicability will have to be repeated in the other parts when those parts are placed before the House. Obviously, the clauses dealing with applicability when they will be confined to this part would by no stretch of imagination be extended to the other parts unless they are repeated there. I think that any lawyer Member of this House should be able to understand that that would be the position, so that when the other parts come to be discussed it would be open to the House to see whether the same definition which is given now as to the territorial applicability of this part or the social applicability of this part should be the same as will be enacted so far as this part is concerned. It will be open to the House and also for the Government to see to it whether those parts should be made applicable universally in all parts of India, or whether they should be applicable to all communities, or whether any exception might be made. That is a matter which I think should be left to the future Government, the future Law Minister and the future Parliament. Shrimati Renuka Ray (West Bengal) : On a point of order, Sir, Clause 2 has been under discussion for three days in the previous session and three days now six days in all. Almost all the speeches on clause 2 have gone into the merits of the provisions of the whole Bill. I want to ask whether once the consideration stage is over, is it open on a discussion of a clause, to go into every detail of the Bill as it has been done during the debate on clause 2 ? Shrimati Durgabai: May I seek a clarification. In the light of what the hon. the Law Minister has stated and also in the light of the fact that this House attaches considerable importance—the greatest importance—to the clauses relating to inheritence, because they are based on the principle of equality, is it the intention of Government to bring a separate Bill relating to those clauses in the next session of Parliament, if not during this session of Parliament ? 10 a m

1083 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Dr. Ambedkar: I am afraid that is entirely outside my jurisdiction. It is a matter which I should leave to the Prime Minister to answer. Shri Deshbandhu Gupta (Delhi): In view of the statement that has been made by the Hon. the Law Minister, may I know whether it is also the intention of Government to change the title of the Bill, because it is no longer a Code ? Dr. Ambedkar: When I reach clause 55, I shall move all the necessary amendments to make this an independent Bill and take it out of the Code. The Prime Minister and Minister of External Affairs (Shri Jawaharlal Nehru): If I have gathered purport of the hon. Member’s question, it was whether other parts of the Bill will be introduced in this session or in a subsequent session. So far as Government are concerned, we have often stated that we stand by the whole Bill. Our difficulty has been the difficulty of time, and we decided to proceed with Part II in this session and to pass it. That did not mean that we were giving up any other part and we would very much like to have the other parts passed too. But practically speaking, there is no chance of our doing that in the present session. Whenever we can avail of an opportunity we should like to take up the other parts. Mr. Deputy Speaker : The Hon. the Prime Minister was not here when this point was raised. When Sardar Man was on his legs, he was referring to the other parts of the Bill inasmuch as they will be applicable to the Sikhs. At that stage, a point was raised as to whether the Hon. the Prime Minister has not already stated that this measure will now be confined to marriage and divorce and as such discussion should be confined to those two subjects. Having regard to the number of days that have been spent on this clause, I wanted to conclude the discussion on this today. The Hon. the Law Minister then said that it was intended to confine this Bill only to marriage and divorce and suitable amendments would be moved even with respect to the title. In regard to the other parts of the Bill it was said that a fresh Bill would be introduced which would also cover the applicability of this Bill to the territories or communities. A further question was asked as to when that Bill would be introduced, to which the Hon. the Law Minister replied that the Prime Minister alone must answer that question. That is why I was a little doubtful if the Prime Minister has been apprised of the discussion that took place here.

1084 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Dr. Ambedkar: I perhaps forgot to say that after clause 55 is reached, I shall not only introduce suitable amendments with the object of making that particular part self-contained, but I shall also move a motion that this Bill, so to say as amended, be passed independently of the other parts. With regard to the other question, I have looked into the Rules of Procedure. There will be two courses open. One course that will be open to me would be to move that the other clauses be put and negatived, so that Government will be free to bring them together in a separate code or separate part or separate Bill and move them whenever they want. The other course permissible—subject to your ruling—under the Rules of Procedure would be to let those parts stand. I find from the rules that there is nothing to prevent this Parliament from taking out a particular part or a particular portion from a whole Bill that has been before it and to treat it as an independent Bill and pass it. That is a matter which I am prepared to leave to you and to the House. Our present intention is to stop with clause 55 and certain relevant Schedules. I think that makes the position clear. Shri Jawaharlal Nehru : My hon. colleague has made the position quite clear. I entirely agree with him. We are for the present going to confine ourselves to Part II and complete it as a whole, apart from the rest. Then it depends on various possibilities, as to how best to deal with the rest of the Bill. But this ought to be kept separate. May I also qualify, or amend, a statement which I made about the length of this session. I said that we would like it to end on the 6th October. As I see the debate proceeding, there is no chance of its ending on the 6th October. So, it will have to go on till we finish important work. Shri Deshbandhu Gupta : May I seek a clarification ? The Hon. the Law Minister has made it quite clear that this will be a selfcontained Bill dealing with monogamy, marriage and divorce. If that is so and the subsequent Bills will also be self-contained Bills, then the question of Hindu Code as such does not arise. Therefore, there will be different Bills and codification will have to follow later on, if necessary. Therefore we are not proceeding with the Bill as it is. We are only proceeding with the different heads of the Bill and at the moment we are only concerned with these three things. Shri Ramalingam Chettiar (Madras) : There are several provinces which have already got laws on monogamy and divorce.

1085 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Probably they are better, though the provisions that we are going to agree here is a compromise. We are having this compromise simply because we are going to have a Code. In case the present law is going to be confined to marriage and divorce, why not leave those laws which are passed by the different provinces alone and leave it to the people of those provinces to choose. This is an important issue which you have to consider. Pandit Malaviya (Uttar Pradesh) : May I suggest to the Hon. the Law Minister whether it will not help if he did that at this stage rather than wait till the end ? Dr. Ambedkar : I do not see any reason for doubting the motives of Government. I have said, and we propose to stand by what we have said. Pandit Malaviya : I am surprised that he should think that there is any doubt of his motives in what I said. I asked, will it not help if he did it at this stage, because if that is the thing which we are considering, it might become a slightly different situation for some of us. Dr. Ambedkar : Take it that it will be so. Pandit Malaviya: When we are in Parliament legislating, it is difficult to take things unless they are done. I simply asked, will it therefore not help if it is done now. Mr. Deputy Speaker : The Hon. the Law Minister has made the intention of the Government clear. My only difficulty is this—I am not asking him to do it immediately—but when once we pass clause 2 and take up clause 55 I have got a doubt technically as to whether we can modify clause 2 then, at that stage. Dr. Ambedkar: At the time when you put this clause 2, I want to make a reservation that I reserve to myself the necessary liberty of making certain consequential amendments to clause 2. Some Hon. Members : No, no. How can it be ? Dr. Ambedkar: That is perfectly possible. Pandit Malaviya : That is authoritarian and not parliamentary ! Mr. Deputy Speaker: There is nothing unparliamentary. The Hon. the Law Minister has been extremely reasonable. There is no good losing one’s reason or making recriminations. It does not contribute to the coolness of the atmosphere that must prevail here. I understand the Law Minister. He has no mental reservations. He wanted to bring it by way of amendment to clause 55. Then I thought