Vol. 14, Part II · pages 36–40

816 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Secondly, there is an alternative amendment. If this is not acceptable, I would commend the other alternative amendment to the acceptance of the House. The alternative amendment runs thus: In the amendment proposed by Shri Banarsi Prasad Jhunjhunwala, printed as No. 18 in Supplementary List No. 1 in the proposed proviso to clause 2, for the words beginning with the words “unless such person” to the end, substitute: “unless such person, after attaining the age of majority, declares in writing that he or she, as the case may be, shall be governed by this Code, and gets such declaration registered in accordance with rules prescribed for the purpose by the Central Government.” Mr. Jhunjhunwala’s amendment, as further amended by me, would run as follows: “2. Application of Code. —This Code or any part or parts thereof applies to all the citizens of India that is Bharat……..” and then follows that this will be applicable only to those persons who would make a declaration in writing and so on and so forth ; I need not repeat that. Sir, I propose this amendment with a full sense of responsibility, and I hope I will not be misunderstood, as I hope the two previous speakers would not be misunderstood, for my amendment it is very much in line with the two amendments which have already been moved by my friend Mr. Sarwate and my friend Shri Indra Vidyavachaspati. Only mine is an improvement on theirs. I would like to submit first of all, that in proposing this amendment, I am actuated more particularly by the consideration that this Hindu Code should have an easy passage in this House. That is my first consideration. My second consideration is that it should be easily acceptable to the country as a whole, to the various sections of the community, to the various sections of the nation. And thirdly my consideration is that it should not be said of us that in this Parliament, in this country where we have a secular State, where we took very great pains to frame a constitution with the background of a secular State, we are now trying to legislate in a manner which smells of communalism, which clearly indicates that we are trying to legislate for one section of the community and not for the others, that we are trying to legislate for persons who profess one religion and are ignoring the interests of those who profess another religion, or vice-versa, that we are trying to do something to encroach upon the rights and religious customs of one section of the community

817 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL and are afraid to encroach upon the rights and privileges of another section of the community professing another religion. Therefore, I submit that if my amendment is accepted, it will have very many advantages and absolutely no disadvantage. I was very happy to hear the point of order raised this morning by my friend Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad, not that I was particularly in agreement with the point of order raised by him, but because of the considerations and the reasons behind his point of order, and the considerations which weighed with him in raising that point of order. He raised the point of order, that the Constitution does not permit us to enact a discriminatory legislation. He referred to article 15 of the Constitution. He referred also to article 25. I feel that the idea working in his mind was, if the provisions of the Hindu Code are beneficent and useful, why should they not be applicable to other sections of the Nation also? And what is in his mind, I am sure, is in keeping with the signs of the times. He would, I am sure, be glad, according to the point of order raised by him, to make an attempt to enact a legislation which would be applicable to all sections of the nation, Hindus, Muslims, Parsis and Christians. There is, of course, another article of the Constitution—article 44 to which reference was made by my friend Mr. Sarwate, that the State shall attempt to have a uniform Civil Code. True, that article is not included in the chapter of Fundamental Rights, but it is under the chapter dealing with the Directive Principles. The Constitution directs us specifically that we should make an attempt to have a uniform Civil Code for the whole country. Well, this is the first occasion when we are attempting to have a Civil Code and in this very first attempt, will it be proper for us, will it be desirable for us to ignore this very important article of the Constitution ? Let us not make a beginning by doing something contrary to the specific directive that has been given to us by the Constitution. When we were sitting as the Constituent Assembly— we all were in it, most of us, and many other eminent persons who are not here were also there—many Muslim Members were also there, and there were Parsis also, and there were also Christians, and persons professing every faith were there. All of them, as far as I remember, unanimously agreed to these clauses in the Constitution, I mean articles 15, 25 and 44. When all those persons professing every faith, were seriously and coolly and calmly considering what sort of legislation we should have in this country, they all unanimously decided that we should have a uniform legislation, so as to be in conformity with

818 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES articles 15 and 25 of the Constitution, and also article 44. What has happened since then and now to compel us, to persuade us not to act according to those articles of our Constitution ? Nothing has really happened since then, which should persuade us to go contrary to those provisions. On the other hand, we find that even persons professing religions other than Hinduism, are also anxious that we should have a uniform Civil Code. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad is a representative of the Muslims. He himself says that it is not open to have a legislation which will govern only one section of the nation, but that one legislation, must govern all the sections of the nation, all persons professing various religions. That being so, I submit there is no reason why we should hesitate to legislate for persons professing different religions. From the amendments that have been tabled and have already been moved. I find that the Sikhs would like to go away from the operation of this Code. That is the effect of one of the amendments moved by my hon. friend Sardar Hukam Singh. Then I find that there are other Hon. Members who are anxious that this clause 2 should be so amended that it should not be applicable necessarily to all the States and all the community. My Hon. Friend Pandit Thakurdas Bhargava, as we all know, is a very great social reformer, and he is always anxious to introduce legislations in this House directed towards social uplift. According to his amendment what he wants is that it should be left open to the various States to adopt the legislation or not. He also desires that it should be open to the various communities either to be governed by the Code or not. Shri Tyagi : Surely it will not be territorially uniform in that case. Shri J. R. Kapoor : Exactly. In order to make it applicable to all the territories and communities my amendment should be accepted. It does not restrict the operation of this Code to one territory or another, nor to one community or another. On the other hand it extends the scope of this legislation and seeks to embrace within its ambit Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Parsis or persons professing any other faith. During the general discussion of this Bill some good points were made by my hon. Friends Dr. Tek Chand and Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava. They said that this Bill would operate in a great measure as a hardship on various sections of the Hindu community, among whom marriage and divorce laws are easy. In some parts of the Punjab and elsewhere, it was pointed, marriages can be easily performed. Why should they be deprived of this easy manner of their marriages ?

819 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Dr. Deshmukh (Madhya Pradesh) : Easy marriage, easy divorce ! Shri J. R. Kapoor : In the matter of divorce they have easy laws in various parts of the country, among various sections of the people. Why should those laws be made more difficult ? On the one hand the contention of some was that marriage and divorce laws were made more and more strict by the Code and on the other, the contention of others was why should these marriage and divorce laws be enforced on persons who did not believe in them. My submission therefore is that this Code in whatever form it is passed, should not be forced on any particular section of the Hindu community, or the Sikhs or Jains. It should be left open to them to be governed by it or not. Secondly, some of the provisions of this Code—particularly those relating to monogamy and divorce, with which I am in entire agreement and would like them to be made a little more liberal—are so good that I see no reason why the Muslims should not be entitled to have the advantage thereof. My hon. Friends Shri Sarwate and Shri Indra have moved their amendments. Particularly the amendment of Shri Indra wants that the whole Code should be compulsorily made applicable to the Muslims. I do not want that it should be so enforced on Muslims just as I do not want that it should be obligatory on every Hindu to be governed by this Code. I want that it should be open to a Hindu, Muslim, Parsi or for the matter of that any person professing any other religion hereto or hereafter, in fact it should be open to every citizen of India either to be governed by the Code or not. Dr. Ambedkar : Great liberal ! Shri J. R. Kapoor : Not only that, I want that it should be open to anybody to pick and choose various parts of the Code. I am making this statement with all seriousness, because of this reason. There are various clauses in this Bill which should be readily acceptable to some but not to others, similarly there are other clauses which may be acceptable to others but not to all. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : Does my hon. Friend contend that the choice of the person should be per clause ? Shri J. R. Kapoor : Not per clause but various important parts of the Code. When I made that suggestion I knew that it may require the legal intelligence of Dr. Ambedkar as also Pandit Bhargava and other legal luminaries to amend the various sections of the Code so as to make them fall in line with my amendment. I am sure that this

820 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES task is not beyond the capacity of Dr. Ambedkar or Pandit Bhargava or other legal luminaries. Speaking for myself I am particularly in favour of the clause relating to monogamy and divorce. But there are other clauses which I would not like to adopt. I would therefore like to have the liberty of making a declaration to the fact that so far as I am concerned I would like to be governed by the clauses relating to monogamy and divorce and not others. I would beg of this house very seriously to consider the suggestion. Firstly, that this enactment should be applicable to the entire nation, secondly, it should be open to anyone to say by declaration that he wants to be governed by this Code and thirdly, it should be open to him to say also that he wants to be governed by this or that chapter. Dr. Deshmukh: If the husband and wife differ on the issue of say divorce, who will decide ? The Minister of Works, Production and Supply (Shri Gadgil) : The child will decide. Mr. Speaker : Let the hon. Member proceed. Shri J. R. Kapoor : If the husband and wife differ on the divorce issue I am prepared to give the choice to the wife, if thereby I can secure the support of the lady Members here. If my suggestion is accepted, of course the various provisions of the Bill will have to be recast. It is a matter of principle. Once the principle is accepted— namely that we should have one uniform law for the whole country, secondly that we should give the liberty to every citizen to say whether he wants to be governed by the Code or not and thirdly, the liberty to pick and choose various aspects of the Code—proper amendments could of course be drafted. I know how difficult it is but difficult as it is certainly it is much easier than the task of getting this Bill passed by this House and, certainly it is easier than to get the support of the entire nation for this Bill as it is, compulsorily enforceable among the Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists. Therefore, I submit that my suggestion should be very seriously considered. I hope and trust that if we consider it coolly, calmly, dispassionately and without any prejudice either for or against it, certainly we shall be able to come to an agreed solution and perhaps within five or seven days we may be able to pass this controversial measure. It will satisfy everybody. It will satisfy those who want to have a uniform Code. It will satisfy the orthodox Hindus because it