Vol. 14, Part II · pages 411–415

1191 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL provide for them by making exceptions in the body of the Code, it is necessary to deadline them. Mr. Deputy Speaker : It is the other way about. He has already made exceptions in favour of these and he has povided for exclusion from the Bill. Shri Rajagopalachari: That is what I have said. Mr. Deputy Speaker : What he wants to do is to include them. Shri Rajagopalchari: I think the hon. Member who has moved the amendment is thinking that we have applied the whole Code bodily to these people and therefore, since you have defined the Hindus, why should you define these people. The answer is, we do not propose to apply the provisions in the Code bodily to them but to provide exceptions and therefore it is necessary to define who they are. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : I fail to appreciate all this fineness. If the Code is to apply, it should straight forward be applied to them, instead of leaving any exceptions. Shri Rajagopalachari: Suppose we applied it to them ; “they” should be defined here. That is what is being done. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : It should apply to all; they are already included in the definition of Hindus. Shri Rajagopalachari: There are exceptional provisions for these people. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Let me understand first; without understanding, I cannot put it to me House. As the Bill stands at present, clause 51 says : “(1) Nothing contained in this Part shall be deemed to affect any right conferred by the Madras Marumakkattayam Act, 1932 to obtain the dissolution of a sacramental marriage, whether solemnised before or after the commencement of this Code.” Therefore, under the Bill as it has emerged from the Select Committee, Marumakkattayam Law is allowed to apply so far as those persons who are governed by this law are concerned. What the Hon. Law Minister wants to do is not to create exceptions in favour of any particular class, but to bring them all under this Act. Dr. Ambedkar: Yes. Mr. Deputy Speaker : That is what Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad wants. Originally he was under the impression that an exception is sought to be made. He was under the impression that originally those governed by the Marumakkattayam law and Aliyasantana law were governed

1192 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES by this Code and the Hon. Law Minister wanted to make exceptions and that is what he objects to. Now that he knows that the original Act made an exception and they are being brought under it, he withdraws his objection, but he clutches,—let me withdraw that word— he wants to raise a formal thing, regarding the definition of Marumakkattayam and Aliyasantana. The substance has gone. Why should he worry himself over these formal things ? Shri Naziruddin Ahmad: Clause 51 should be deleted. That would be enough. Mr. Deputy Speaker: That is a matter of procedure. Dr. Ambedkar: We will come to that later on. Mr. Deputy Speaker: We will come to that later on. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : There are special provisions in this Bill for all these people. That should be dropped. The definition should also be dropped. Mr. Deputy Speaker: There is no harm in making it clear. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad: It would only be showing one’s nose in a round about way. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Aliyasantana law is not a general law going into the customs and other things. This is a Code. The Minister of State for Transport and Railways (Shri Santhanam): After we have finished the whole thing, if any substantial provision of Aliyasantana Act does not come in, then we can revert to this, if it is superfluous. It is better to start with a definition because some provisions as they stand has reference to it. Mr. Deputy Speaker : I suppose the hon. Member Mr. Naziruddin does not see any necessity for this. As a matter of fact, his point has been put forward in the Hon. Law Ninister’s amendment. Therefore, all the amendments standing in the name of Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad are not moved. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : No, no. Deputy Speaker : Amendment No. 372 is a formal one, I shall take the responsibility for re-numbering. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : Amendment 410 is not pressed. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Then, there are amendments 374 and 375. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : I press amendment No. 374. But, my amendment No. 377 comes earlier. Mr. Deputy Speaker : The hon. Member may move it. So far as formal amendments are concerned with regard to brackets, etc., I shall instruct the office about them.

1193 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : I shall not move then any more at all. That is quite enough. I Move Amendment No. 377. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava (Punjab): Am I to take it that you have exhausted sub-clause (i) ? I have got an amendment. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Let me first finish the first clause. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargaya: I have no objection if Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad claims to move all his amendments first. Shri Naziruddin Ahmad: It is not a claim; it would be more convenient. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Let me first dispose of sub-clause (i) of clause 3. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : I beg to move; In part (i) of clause 3, for the words “among Hindus” substitute the words “among persons to whom this Code applies.” I do not want to make any speech as the thing is very apparent. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Amendment moved : In part (i) of clause 3, for the words “among Hindus” substitute the words “among persons to whom this Code applies.” Shri Santhanam : Clause 2, sub-clause (3) covers this point fully.; ‘Hindus’ means all people to whom this Code applies. Mr. Deputy Speaker: This House has already adopted the definition. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : I know that. But, nothing is lost if we use these words which are very expressive. Suppose a person reads any other section ; then, he has to know what me definition is. Unless he keeps the definition in mind, he would not be able to know to whom this Code applies. These words express the meaning fully. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Even then, he has to revert back to the meaning of persons to whom this Code applies. We are only using and expanded definition. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : ‘Persons to whom this Code applies’: he has to take this definition everywhere. This is more particular. I leave it to the House. Mr. Deputy Speaker : I am only trying to know whether it is a matter of substance on which greater emphasis should be laid or a formal thing. Anyhow, I take it as moved. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava: I beg to move: In part (i) omit the words “and uniformity”.

1194 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Shri Santhanam : I want to get one point clear. Does the hon. Member suggest that if there was a custom one thousand years ago in a particular………. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava: I have not yet spoken on my amendment, and my hon. Friend there is already opposing it. Mr. Deputy Speaker : No, the mover only means that uniformity is a difficult matter for the whole of India. Amendment moved: In part (i) omit the words “and uniformity”. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : With your permission I shall move my other amdendment also : In part (i) of clause 3,— (a) after the words “group or family” occurring in line 4, add the following; “or any rule which is certain not unreasonable and has been judicially recognised as valid and binding in any local area, tribe, community, group or family” ; and (b) Omit the first proviso. If you will allow me, I shall argue out my point in moving these amendments. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Not now, I shall come back to the hon. Member. Amendment moved : In part (i) of clause 3,— (a) after the words “group or family “occurring in line 4, add the following : “or any rule, which is certain not unreasonable and has been judicially recognised as valid and binding in any local area, tribe, community, group or family”; and (b) Omit the first proviso. Shri Jhunjhunwala (Bihar): I want to move my amendment No. 413 in a slightly modified form, using the word “ varna” for the word “caste” occurring there. Dr. Ambedkar : It rather confuses me if the word “sub-clause” is used when referring to these parts or items of the clauses. In matters of this sort, we speak of items. They are referred to as item 1 and item 2 and so on. There are no sub-clause to these clauses. They may please be referred to as entries or items. Mr. Deputy Speaker : There are these clauses and then these sub-clauses and so I........ Shri Santhanam : No, Sir, Sub-clauses are numbered as usual. Dr. Ambedkar: Whatever word may be adopted, it is better to avoid the word “sub-clause”.

1195 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Mr. Deputy Speaker: All right. I shall use the word “entry” or “part”. Here Mr. Jhunjhunwala wants to modify his amendment by changing the word “caste” into “varna” —as was suggested by the Law Minister yesterday. Shri Jhunjhunwala: I beg to move : In part (i) after the word “tribe” insert the word “ varna”. I would, also like to move my amendment No. 414 with a slight modification, omitting the words coming after the words “principle castes”, I beg to move : After part (i) insert the following new part: “(ia) the word “vama” means according to the context in each case four principle “ vamas”. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Amendment moved: After part (i) insert the following new part: “(ia) the word” “ Varna” means according to the context in each case four principle “ varnas” . Shri R. K. Chaudhari (Assam): I beg to move: Omit the Provisions to part (i) of clause 3. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Amendment moved : Omit the provisions to part (i) of clause 3. Shri Syamnandan Sahaya (Bihar): I also want to move the amendment. We both of us have given notice of the amendment jointly. Mr. Deputy Speaker: I do not attach much importance to the moving of the amendment by all the Members. But if the hon. Member wants to withdraw any amendment, then I will see that the other hon. Member has his say or if the hon. Member is absent, then the other hon. Member will be able to withdraw it. Captain A. P. Singh (Vindhya Pradesh): I want to move my amendment No. 378, dealing with part (viii). Mr. Deputy Speaker: We have not come up to that part. Shri Syamnandan Sahaya: You were pleased to say that you would first deal with all amendments belonging to one category or group. I suggest that only the amendments dealing with the definition of one thing be taken up now, discussed and disposed of and then we go to another set of amendments dealing with another point. Otherwise it will lead to difficulties. Mr. Deputy Speaker: That is exactly what I am doing. We are now dealing with amendments to only part (i)—“Custom” and “usage.”