Vol. 14, Part II · pages 516–520

1296 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Mr. Chairman: It has already been laid down that as far as particular customs are concerned, they might be taken up when the particular clauses are under discussion. So far as the relevancy about this general clause is concerned, you can discuss in a general way and say that such and such a custom is very old and it has been uniformly observed. You can say that much about the status of a custom, but if we were to take up all the customs and discuss them there will be no end to. There are the relevant clauses and when they are taken up each particular custom can be discussed. That would be the better place. I do not bar this discussion. I am only requesting the Hon. Member and suggesting to him that that would be the more proper place. Here, he can discuss in a general way. Shri Jhunjhunwala : Sir, I will speak according to your ruling. But I would like to submit that I could not get an opportunity to speak on clause 2, although the Hon. Speaker ruled that, as in the case of clause 2. Members could speak practically on all matters while discussing clause 4. Only the clause relating to property, could not be discussed. I am pointing out to the House the advantages and disadvantages of the provisions relating to divorce and marriage. I think I was never irrelevant. Anyway, I would now abide by your ruling, and briefly submit my view point. I now come to my amendments. Babu Ramnarayan Singh : Very good. Dr. Ambedkar: Take your seat now. Shri Jhunjhunwala: I will take my seat, you kindly withdraw this Code and relieve the Hindu Community of it. Dr. Ambedkar: Please sit down. Shri Jhunjhunwala: You leave and I will sit down. Dr. Ambedkar: Take your seat, or I will go. Shri Jhunjhunwala: You go, and I will also sit. Mr. Chairman: I would ask the Hon. Member to continue his speech. Shri Jhunjhunwala : I am coming to my speech but the Law Minister, who is a responsible person, is indulging in unnecessary interruptions. He wants that this thing should be talked over and Government’s money be spent somehow. He is not so anxious to grant equal rights to women but he is more keen to see that Government’s money is spent somehow so that people outside might know that the Law Minister is not idle.

1297 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Mr. Chairman : May I request the Hon. Member that he should proceed with his speech instead of answering these questions. Shri Jhunjhunwala : Sir, I am prepared to abide by your orders. But when any Hon. Member interrupts, it becomes difficult to proceed further and it also takes more time to come to the speech proper. Dr. Ambedkar: Do not get nervous, they are your comrades. Shri Jhunjhunwala : Comrades also desert sometimes. I have had a number of comrades like you. You have been professing yourself to be a champion of women’s cause, but ultimately deserted them. Sir, I am continuing with my speech but the Hon. Minister interrupts. Sardar B. S. Man : Will it not be discourteous to the Hon. Law Minister to ignore the interruptions and not to reply to it ? Shri Jhunjhunwala : Then there is another point which I would like to submit. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava said that if anything is suggested that might lead to some harm and if anybody is doing a wrong thing, then how far is it proper to ask others also to do the same thing ? How far is it wise to ask women to do wrong to men if the latter are behaving in that manner ? That is what I am going to point out. Then we have to see whether this thing is progressive or not. Our Hon. Minister of Home Affairs, Shri Rajaji is not here at present. He made some remark while referring the Press Bill to Select Committee. He said that an article or a caricature about him (I do not exactly remember what it was) appeared in some paper. When he saw it, he found it most revolting and at the same time very obscene. He did not know why it was published and felt it very much. But he said when he saw the news papers of the present day, he felt there was nothing special in that paper which should have offended him ( Interruptions). My hon. Friends are trying to interrupt me. Mr. Chairman : If you address the Chair perhaps you will not feel that inconvenience. Shri Jhunjhunwala : I am accustomed to look all round while speaking. So, he said that it was quite insignificant. As compared to the articles and caricatures that appear in the present day press, that thing did not seem to be obscene at all. He said he felt it unnecessarily. The newspapers force us to see and read those things that we do not like to see, and young men and women of the country read them. God knows what influence those things might be leaving on our youths.

1298 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Now, I wanted to ask at that time whether these articles etc. that appear in our press are progressive. These are far more obscene than that which you thought to be quite vulgar. Then, are they progressive and if they are progressive do they prove beneficial for us ? So, I wanted to point out that our Law Minister who is the Manu of Kaliyug ……… Shri Syamnandan Sahaya : Not the Manu of Kaliyug but Kaliyugi Manu. Shri Jhunjhunwala : We are living in Kaliyug hence I called him the Manu of Kaliyug. Our Hon. Minister Shri Gadgil who considers himself to be an outcast Brahmin and thinks he is a Pandit has given him this title. All that I mean to say is that he is the Manu of this age. I wanted to know whether the purpose of this progressive measure is to uplift our society or to degrade and demoralize it. I could have understood the whole thing if he had convinced me beofre I had moved my amendments that the measure was progressive in such and such manner. He only said that it was progressive and that women should be given equal rights. He has denied those rights to them that they needed most and which could have benefited them very much. The right which he is giving to them is that of divorce. So, I was trying to point out whether this is really progressive. I say this can never be progressive. If a person does something wrong, it is not wise that I should also repeat the same thing for that reason. On the other hand, such legislation should be made whereby the person doing a wrong thing might be forbidden to do it in future. It should not be that the other person may also be asked to follow him. That was about this clause. Now, I would move my amendments and fully express my views on them. I have already read them out and so I would not read them again. This will take more time. Shri Syamnandan Sahaya : How would we understand and vote upon them. Mr. Chairman : Has he already read them ? Shri Jhunjhunwala: Yes Sir, I have read them. Mr. Chairman : Then there is no necessity of reading them again. Shri Syamnandan Sahaya : We have to vote upon them. You must read them. Shri Jhunjhunwala : My first amendment is that if anything in the Code is against the Hindu, Sikh, Jain or Buddhist religions or

1299 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL against Marumakkattayam and Aliyasanthanam laws, then it shall not apply to them. Dr. Ambedkar: It shall apply only to the marwaris. Shri Jhunjhunwala : Had it not applied to the marwaris, even then I would not have sat. This code is dangerously harmful to the society and the country. Mr. Chairman: The Hon. Member should continue. Shri Jhunjhunwala : The Hon. Minister is interrupting and casting aspersions. Our Constitution provides for equal rights. Why do you not allow me to reply to his remarks ? Mr. Chairman : I am also asking him not to interrupt, the Hon. Member may go on. Shri Jhunjhunwala : You turn towards him and then say, so that he may hear. Mr. Chairman : I have acquired this habit from the Hon. Member. I would ask the Hon. Minister not to interrupt. Shri Jhunjhunwala : Now in this connection, I would like to read before the House Article 25 of the Constitution. I would request the Hon. Members to listen patiently: “25. (1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess practice and propagate religion.” (2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law— (a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;” Babu Ramnarayan Singh : Kindly translate it into Hindi. Shri Jhunjhunwala : You engage a teacher for that. Then there is : “(b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.” After that there is explanation which I need not read. So I submit to the Chair and the Hon. Members of this House that the purpose of my amendments is that when you make an effort to introduce reforms, you have no right to touch our Dharmshastras. But you can

1300 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES bring in any measure if it does not conflict with our shastras and our religion. My amendment relates to the following : “any text, rule, or interpretation of Hindu law, or any custom or usage or any other law in force immediately prior to the commencement of this Code shall cease to have effect as respects any of the matters dealt with in this Code.” “Any other law in force immediately before the commencement of this Code shall cease to have effect in so far as it is inconsistent with the provisions of this Code.” I want to submit that I have no objection to this legislation. It is alright but if there is anything which is against any religion, Hindu, Sikh or Jain then it would not apply to it. Shir Naziruddin Ahmad : And Muslims ? Shri Jhunjhunwala : Muslims do not come in the purview of this Bill. Then, in the next amendment, there is morality in place of religion. You cannot provide for anything in the law which has its effect on the morality of the people and which leads to their moral degeneration. This is what I have to say. This amendment should be added. We have been given this right under the Constitution. If this amendment is not accepted, I would think that our Government is slandering and vilifying our religion. They should not do it. My third amendment is based on Article 29, wherein the following has been said about culture: “29. (1) Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same.” My submission is that if this code affects or comes in conflict with our culture or the culture of Hindus, Sikhs, Jains or the culture of any section of the Hindus, then again it shall not be applicable under those circumstances. [Mr. Deputy Speaker in the Chair ] Therefore, while moving these threee amendments before the House,. I would urge the Hon. Members to accept my amendments first and then pass the clause. In the first instance I would ask them, not to pass the clause at all but if they pass it my amendments should also be accepted along with it. I would not take any more time now and finish. (English translation concluded).