Vol. 14, Part II · pages 501–505

1281 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL to our Hon. Minister of Law that it is improper for us, being ignorant of the traditions, to deal with all these traditions in this manner. Secondly, it is not wise to destroy completely these traditions and specially when they do not go against any rule or Bill. I have heard that in some cases in some parts, these customs and traditions are being given their due place. But no amendments have come before us in regard to them. An Hon. Member : Amendments regarding marriage have come. Shri T. N. Singh : But amendments regarding other things have not come, perhaps they are about to come. I welcome them. But at the same time I would submit that it is not correct to make laws for them in a sweepig manner with a view to eradicate them. That is why I oppose this measure particularly. If you were to read this clause, it will be found that the words ‘any other laws in force’ have been added to the clause now framed i.e. any other law or Act which is inconsistent with it would also be repealed and would not be applicable. In that case, would it not be proper if you also said in regard to these traditions that the inconsistent things would not be applied and any coustom or tradition going against any of its principles or basic aims would not be applicable. If so, it would have been understandable. But to say that no tradition would apply is not fair and I believe that it is essential to change or amend it carefully. I do agree that many of our traditions are inconsistent and are perhaps not accroding to the times. According to some of the current traditions, an aged man of 60 or 70 can also marry. But it is regretted that this is not incongruous with the Hindu Code. What I mean to say is that if you have to axe any tradition, axe such traditions. Shri A. C. Shukla: Those regarding dowry. Shri T. N. Singh: Yes, there are many others, like widow remarriage etc. You made scores of laws regarding them and did many things, but did we succeed through them ? That is why I say that every tradition should be thoroughly studied. I am opposed to removing all of them. I do not mean that none of our traditions is wrong. Shri A. C. Shukla : May I ask a question ? How will you determine that a particular tradition is good or bad ? If 75 per cent, people of a community want a custom to be retained, should their view be accepted, and should the customary law, as stated by Shri Jangde, be reformed ? Everybody wants reform of the bad customs. Therefore, let us know how it should be determined.

1282 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Shri T. N. Singh : The question put by Shri Shukla is very simple. It is not you or I who reform the traditions. It is done by the whole society, the whole community, according to the dictates of the time and it can never be said that all traditions have remained unchanged. All of them have undergone changes. But I say that when we apply our individual judgment as against our collective wisdom, it becomes our duty to study them fully. That is all I have to say. I do not say that no customs should be changed, but we should change them with our collective wisdom. We have the right to do so in this manner, but we should not do it through legislation. This is what I want to say. Shri A. C. Shukla: How ? Shri T. N. Singh : Many of the traditions which you regard as bad get changed by the pressure of public opinion. Many others change according to the dictates of time. It is said that at one time when a child was bom in sparta, it was thrown away. If it could survive one day and one night, it was brought back and given a lease of life. This is correct. There was a special necessity for that tradition at that time. These traditions change with the times as the needs of society change. Dr. Ambedkar: You are arguing a bad case. Shri T. N. Singh: I do not understand this. When I believe that you are making a vain effort, you might think that I am supporting a bad case. The thing is that you do not have full knowledge of our traditions. Only after studying them completely you might change them and those traditions which are very good, whether they are sustained by this Code or not should ………… Shri A. C. Shukla: Are they recorded ? Shri T. N. Singh : We live in this country and know them. It is, therefore, improper to axe these good traditions and I would like that either this clause should be removed altogether or it should be adjusted in the next clause. It should be considered after that, that would be proper. To pass it just now in this form is not proper. *Ch. Ranbir Singh (Punjab): ( English translation of the Hindi speech) I have risen to support amendments No. 420 proposed by Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava and No. 288 of Shri Bhatt. Shri Bhatt by his amendement means that if some customs or usages clash with *P.D., Vol. XV, Part II, 22nd September 1951, pp. 3142-50.

1283 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL the Hindu code Bill, then that clash should not be regarded in the light that the custom is abolished, but it should be allowed to continue for ten years and after that period it should be regarded as finished. Amendment No. 420 by Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava means that those customs which are in accordance with the Hindu Code Bill should be regarded as abolished ; and those customs which are left, their power or their legality should be retained. Whatever has been said by my learned friend Shri Pande, I agee to that and this thing is right and very much heartening. The real purpose of the Hindu Code Bill was considered to be that this Bill was being brought forward to introduce some reforms in the country to remove the prevailing social evils from the society and to bring about some changes in it. How many people would be affected by it has to be taken into consideration and as he said I regard the imposition of this Hindu Code Bill from the backdoor upon those people of this country who were free from it uptil now, as an act of abuse of power. Shri A. C. Shukla : Even if they do not want it they must have it. Ch. Ranbir Singh : Shri Shukla has not understood the meaning of the word imposition used by me, or he has not heard it properly. If he says that the imposition which I have said is wrong then perhaps I would like to know from him whether he can quote any example in which any person from the Punjab, may he be a Hindu or a Sikh or a Muslim, has ever raised his voice that their customary law should be abolished and in place of that they should have the law of Manu, or of Yajnavalkya or of anybody else. Shri A. C. Shukla : When they will become educated they would demand that. Ch. Ranbir Singh: Perhaps Shri Shukla does not know how dynamic personalities have born in our Punjab who have challenged the authorities of our country, although, I do not support them but this is an historical fact that during the recent years nobody had been able to defeat a Congress candidate in the Hindu majority areas, but in the Punjab there was a constituecy in Haryana, which is a Hindu majority area, in which Ch. Chottu Ram had defeated a Congress candidate. Dr. Ambedkar: Ch. Chottu Ram was a great friend of Hindus. Ch. Ranbir Singh : In case the Hon. Dr. Ambedkar has got any document or any other proof about it, I am ready to accept that. But

1284 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES as far as his objective is concerned I am not opposed to that. I am a supporter of monogamy and I want that in some special circumstances arrangement for divorce should also be made so that when some difficulty is felt on both sides, by the man as well as by the woman in living together, a way must be found out to save them from that difficulty. But along with it I cannot help saying that this attempt is nothing but an act of abuse of power, because we should have applied this Hindu Code Bill to those only who wanted to be governed by it. Since this question of Hindu Code Bill has come before this House, it has taken several months and many a day has been spent upon it, I tried hard to snatch some minutes so that I might express my views about it, but unfortunately I could not get a chance. Unfortunately, when Sardar Man spoke about it, instead of coming to the right thing he got himself entangled in the labyrinth of the Sikh religion, perhaps he might have thought that in this way his point would be more forceful or there might have been some other reason. However, I think that this question is not related so Sikhism alone, this is a question pertaining to the customary laws of the whole of the Punjab. I want to bring to the notice of the Hon. Dr. Ambedkar that even in such a time when such Brahmanic rules and regulations with regard to the living customs of the country and the society were being enforced rigidly, viz., one could not go in a particular direction on Mondays or on Tuesdays or on Saturdays, the martial race of the Jats in the Punjab, to which I and the Hon. Sardar Baldev Singh belong, did not yield to the Brahmanic rules and it has not done so even now. I want to submit that really in our society there is no likelihood of any appreciable opposition to the two provisions relating to monogamy and divorce, and I am not personally against them, but I am opposed to the method and manner which you are resorting to. And the manner or the backdoor method through which it has developed is not a proper one. This is not because I regard myself a Non-Hindu but I do feel that we have never been governed by the Hindu code and it has never been enforced with ragard to us. I doubt your intentions that you can govern by the backdoor policy those whom you could not enslave mentally. I disagree with you to a great extent with regard to the rules and regulations which you are enacting in respect of marriage and divorce without caring for the prevailing customs. I want to state with respect to this that many reformers of society have done a great many reforms in the Hindu Society with regard to the widow’s

1285 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL plight but I want to point out that a young widow has remained an unknown thing to our society from times immemorial. Our society does not know the name of a young widow, because it is a custom in our community that when the husband of a woman dies, then after a year of his death the brothers and parents of the widow and the relations of her late husband meet together and in spite of the shyness, as is common everywhere in our Hindu society, and against her formal wish, that she would herself bear the distress that has befallen her, and in spite of her refusal, she is told that this is not possible. It may be said that her ideal is good, but how many people are there who can follow such a high ideal ? The people of our society doubt whether such a lofty ideal which you are going to establish in our society would not create any evil in our - society. Therefore, you should recognise our simple custom of remarriage and not invalidate it. So I wanted to support the proposition laid down by Shri Bhatt. Now I mention the reasons for that. On the one hand where your rules and regulations wanted to reduce the troubles of our womenfolk, and they have reduced them to a great extent, on the other hand their troubles have been increased manifold. And that is because you have given them a sort of right to marry wherever they want. In the ordinary way, if no extraordinary trouble arises it would easily become a custom that they could remarry, but why do you lay dow this restriction ? Generally people are not bigamous of their own will but they are forced by circumstances. If a brother dies, his brother has to concede to the custom of bigamy against his wishes. Shrimati Dixit: I want to ask you a question. There is a woman, who has got four or six children, there is her husband’s brother’s wife, she also has got four or six children. If they are made to live together would not the co-wifely feeling create trouble between them ? Is it not unjustifiable on principle to force a woman to marry another man against her wishes ? Sardar Hukam Singh (Punjab): By the will of god. Ch. Ranbir Singh : If you mean remarriage by that, I would say no : remarriage is possible only when it is regularly sanctioned by society, but there are many women who cannot express their desire. After thirteen or fourteen days of his wife’s death a man may express it, but the women cannot do so due to the peculiar set-up of our society such a thing is impossible, and ample time is required to change that.