Vol. 14, Part II · pages 311–315

1091 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Dr. Ambedkar: I will say “an Act”. Mr. Deputy Speaker : “The marriage and divorce Act” instead of the word “Code”. What I feel that this must be put to the vote of the House. As soon as the Hon. Law Minister finishes his speech, I shall put it straightway to the vote of the House. Shri Ramalingam Chettiar : Rose— Mr. Deputy Speaker : The hon. Member’s issue has already been answered. Any hon. Member, who thinks that there are more progressive laws in the States, can table certain amendments to this clause when we come to the clause by clause stage and thus bring it into line with those State laws. The hon. Member has stated that there are such pieces of legislation in three States and for the sake of uniformity, there must be a central legislation, particularly in view of the fact that this is a Concurrent subject. It is not a difficulty which is insurmountable. Shri Ramalingam Chettiar: It is insurmountable. Mr. Deputy Speaker : The Hon. Law Minister does not yield on that point. Shri Ramalingam Chettiar: I ought to be allowed to move an amendment. Mr. Deputy Speaker: He has had an opportunity to move it. I am not going to allow any further amendments to be moved. What prevented him from moving this particular amendment before ? When the time comes, let me decide upon this amendment. We will assume that the clauses, inheritance etc. were before the House and we went on from day to day. This House may not wait until he chooses to bring this Bill in line with the State Legislatures. It is an unreasonable demand on the part of the hon. Member. Now so far as clause 2 is concerned this clause will apply to any part. With regard to the other parts, we will confine them only to those parts and not proceed with the other parts. For the purpose of clarification. I will not allow discussion to go on at length and on certain imaginary things which may not be placed before this House. We want to cut short the discussion and the Hon. Minister made that statement and has explained that the consequential amendment will only relate to the nomenclature of this Code. I will put it when we come to clause 55 and even if that is passed in the third reading, we can have it. At one stretch I will allow the discussion and then the Hon. Law Minister

1092 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES will reply. Then I will put all the amendments to the vote of the House so that there may be no difficulty as to whom it applies or whether they should take any further proceedings etc. Dr. Ambedkar : I just heard that you would call upon me at one o’clock. But I thought that there is some other business at one o’clock. Perhaps you might give me a minute to start. Shri R. K. Chaudhari : We must know the consequences of marriage and divorce; that is one thing. Then, Sir, you are willing to allow us discuss, about marriage and divorce and all that without knowing what the effect of the marriage would be, whether the issues of the marriage will get inheritance in this way or that way. That will put at a great disadvantage. I am going to contract a marriage and yet I do not know what the consequences are……… Shri Syamnandan Sahaya : We are opposed to it. Shri Deshbandhu Gupta : Are we to take it that the hon. Member is unaware of the consequences of marriage and divorce at this age ? Shri R. K. Chaudhari : I take exception to this. Sir, I was pointing out........ Mr. Deputy Speaker : In all serious matters, the hon. Member has got a knack of introducing a good feeling of humour. To that extent he has relieved the tension. The hon. Member knows too well that he is directly responsible for all the acts that he commits whether on account of conjugal felicity or otherwise. Now, Sardar Man. *Sardar B. S. Man : You will sympathise with me, Sir, being a junior Member, for this interruption for so long a time. Mr. Deputy Speaker : The hon. Member may confine himself to the amendment whether this Bill ought to apply or not. He has already said enough. Sardar B. S. Man : A little allowance due to a junior Member may be allowed to me, Sir. I am exactly in doubt as to what the intention of the Government is. There have been threats of certain reservations, mental reservations regarding moving certain amendments; then there was the explanation by the Prime Minister that they are not proceeding with the Bill except for these two parts because of lack of time. If, incidentally, the House is in a mood to finish it tomorrow, the same position will be there because there will be time to proceed with the * P.D., Vol. XV, Part II, 19th September 1951, pp. 2861-72.

1093 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL rest of the Bill. It was a categorical question whether the Government proposed to drop the rest of the Bill, not in this session ; but whether the present Government is dropping the other portions, now or hereafter. These assurances are of little comfort to me that up to the 6th of October this will not be taken, or that it may not be taken in the present session or it may not be taken for lack of time. This sort of argument is no good. Mr. Deputy Speaker : I may clear the ground. I take the statement of the Hon. Law Minister, the sponsor of the Bill, as the authoritative opinion of the Government. On the footing that they will confine this Bill to marriage and divorce, the hon. Members may go on. That is how I have understood. If there is anything wrong. I may be corrected. Sardar B. S. Man : I was attaching equal importance to the Prime Minister’s statement also. I shall confine myself to my amendment that the Sikhs should be absolved from the operation of this Bill. The fact is that a certain erroneous impression has gained ground that the Sikhs are firstly, Hindus, and secondly, that they have been governed for a very long time by the Hindu Law. My case is that if I proved that the Sikhs were not Hindus and they were not governed to any appreciable extent by the Hindu Law, then, the Sikhs may be permitted to be out of the orbit of this Bill. In that point, I was interrupted again and again and asked how their law differed from the main body of the law. That was my difficulty. I had to prove that the entire mental structure of a Sikh agriculturist in the Punjab, in company with the Hindus and Muslims, was entirely different and the pattern of the present law is entirely different. Shri Bharati: So far as marriage is concerned ? Sardar B. S. Man : Even so far as marriage is concerned. Just wait. Shri Bharati: That is more important. Sardar B. S. Man : Let me quote Sir Charles Roe from his Tribal Laws in the Punjab. This has been cited with approbation by Sir William Clarke, Chief Justice in 55 Punjab Record 1903 Full Bench. He says : “The Hindu agriculturist of the Punjab...” The Hindu agriculturist follows the same law as the Sikh agriculturists. “…knows nothing of caste except as represented...” Now, Sir, certain prohibited degrees are being introduced in the marriage laws. I have to point out that my law as regards marriage’s

1094 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES is different and more liberal than the present Hindu Code Bill. In fact, I do not know, after all the present assurances that only 55 clauses will be finished whether it will be a Hindu Code or not, or what Code it will be. You are asking me to speak upon a Bill even whose name I do not know or whose operation I do not know. Anyway, I shall be guessing that it will be a Civil Code or it will be a Marriage Act or some such thing and the word “Hindu” shall drop out. He says : “The Hindu agriculturist of the Punjab knows nothing of caste except as represented by his tribe. No doubt, he respects the Brahman and calls him and feeds him on occasions of rejoicing or sorrow, but he would never dream of referring to him or to the Hindu Law for guidance in his daily life. If he has ever heared of the Dharmashastra at all, which is very improbable, he has only done so as a Spanish peasant may have heard of the Bible, he knows nothing whatever of its contents or principles, nor could the Brahman himself enlighten him...The Hindu law cannot be applied to the Hindu tribes, because they have never in fact followed or even heard of it and it is framed for a different state of society.” Mr. Deputy Speaker: Extracts from books should be small ; it ought not to be reading whole books, chapter and verse. Sardar B. S. Man : The quotation was very long ; I have cut it short. I have read it only from the beginning and from the end. My difficulty is this. While I am forced to cite the law... Mr. Deputy Speaker: What is the book ? Sardar B. S. Man : The book I am quoting from is Rustomji’s Customary law of the Punjab. This quotation relates to a decided case law in 55 Punjab Record 1903 Full Bench. I have to cite this law because in his previous speech the Hon. Dr. Ambedkar himself quoted a Privy Council decision showing that for a long time Sikhs have been governed by the Hindu Law. I am perfectly entitled today to remove that erroneous impression and show that we are not governed by the Hindu Law. As the position stands today, we are governed by a different set of laws. He relies upon his decisions. I rely upon my decisions. Hence the necessity to take some time of the House. I do realise your anxiety to finish this earlier. But Sir, this is the first time that an amendment has been moved that the Sikhs be absolved from the operation of this Bill and in view of the vital importance of this matter to the Sikh community, I may be permitted to digress a little.

1095 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Mr. Deputy Speaker : Now that this Bill is confined to marriage and divorce, the hon. Member may show how far this is retrograde or inconsistent with his law and what is the harm in adopting this. Sardar B. S. Man : I am quoting exactly those laws which relate to marriage and divorce here. By the present law, certain prohibited degrees are sought to be introduced. I am proving that the prohibited degrees now sought to be introduced have never applied during the history of the Sikhs. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Cannot that be an exception ? As in the case of customs in the south allowing the marriage of maternal uncle’s daughter, which have been validated, any deviation from the generally prohibited degrees will also be put in as an exception. Sardar B. S. Man: Exactly, Sir, you are coming to my rescue. If the Hon. Law Minister says that so far as marriage customs are concerned, they will respect the customs of the Punjab or the customs of the Sikhs, I will have no quarrel ; I shall sit down. Shri Bharati: May I draw his attention to part (5) of cause 7 where it is provided, “unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a sacramental marriage between the two”. Custom is a local thing and that has overriding effect. We have already provided for all that, not only for south India. Where the custom provides for such a thing, it is straightway concerned. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : But what he wants is that all the things incidental to marriage should also be governed by custom. That is what he is pointing out. Shri Bharati : But he was speaking about prohibitive degrees and I pointed out that the necessary provisions are already there for these exceptions. Mr. Deputy Speaker: No law says that a sister can marry a brother. There are prohibitive degrees accepted by courts and if there are other cases or other degrees, whether they come under clause 5 or clause 7 or any other clause, suitable amendments can be suggested and the matter discussed. Sardar B. S. Man : My point is, since exceptions are made in the case of Muslims and Christians because their personal law is entirely different, why should we, though we are numerically small, not have the same... Mr. Deputy Speaker : The hon. Member need not repeat his arguments over and over again. He has already stated that just like the Muslims, the Sikhs too should be excluded.