Vol. 14, Part II · pages 91–95

871 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Panditji made a reference to the proviso to sub-clause (2) of Clause 2 which reads : “Provided that if it is proved that such person would not have been governed by the Hindu law or by any custom or usage as part of that law in respect of any of the matters dealt with herein if this Code had not been passed, then, this Code shall not apply to that person in respect of those matters.”. What I understood him to say was that perhaps this might save the custom and usage prevalent in the Punjab. But I differ from him, because sub-clause (2) reads: “ This Code also applies to any other person, who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion;” and read with this sub-clause, the proviso does not refer to the custom or usage of the Hindus or Sikhs. Therefore, in my humble opinion this would not save the custom or usage and I, therefore, do not entertain his hope. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava: I never said that this proviso would save our customs or usage. What I meant was that if it is proved that we are not governed by the Hindu Law—the words are, “ provided that if it is proved that such person would not have been governed by the Hindu Law”—Punjabis would not be covered by this proviso. But our customs and usage will not be saved. It applies to all the Hindus. What I meant was that, as a matter of fact, our customs and usage should be saved by another provision which should say that we are allowed to be governed by our own customs, etc. But this proviso will introduce a certain amount of uncertainty. Sardar Hukam Singh : Sub-clause (1) of Clause 2 definitely lays down that the Code will apply to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs and also converts to Hinduism. Therefore, so far as I am concerned, there is no ambiguity at all. Be that as it may Panditji no doubt agrees with me to this extent that our custom and usage would not be saved at any rate. Sir, if a uniform Code had been attempted for all the citizens of India, then perhaps I would not have stood up and raised this objection, even if I had been called upon as a Punjabee to make some sacrifices. I would have made sacrifices in the hope that if we can grow up as a united nation, as one people, certainly some sections will have to make some sacrifices. But that is not the object here. No attempt is being made to weld all people into one nation by this Code. There

872 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES is discrimination between one community and another. Therefore, I think I am perfectly justified in opposing it. I should however make it clear here that so far as some Chapters of this Bill are concerned, I am in complete agreement with them. I am only opposed to three portions of it. If different parts had been put before the House separately, certainly I believe that most of it would have been passed without any controversy. But as it stands we have to take them as a whole and, therefore, I stand up to oppose them, because I cannot permit them to be passed without my voice being heard. The provisions to which I am opposed are (1) those relating to marriage and its dissolution by divorce, (2) adoption and (3) inheritance. (An hon. Member: What is left then ?) Much remains even then. It has been said by Panditji that it applies to those persons who were already governed by Hindu Law. This is correct. But if we have consented to be governed by Hindu Law, that does not necessarily mean that we should be compelled to revolve round the wheel even though it goes into foreign spheres and borrows certain things from other religions and other laws simply because I have once been dragged into it. I should not be compelled to revolve round it, though it does not remain within its own sphere. Then again, Sir, there is a misconception. The Hindu Code Bill says that the Sikhs are governed by Hindu Law. Now section 5 of the Punjab Customary Law—which has already been quoted by my hon. friend Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava says: “ Custom in this province is the first rule of decision in all questions regarding succession, special property of females, betrothal, marriage, divorce, dowery, adoption, guardianship, minority, bastardy, family relations, wills, legacies, gifts, partitions, any religious usage or institution, or alluvion and diluvion.” Now I ask : When I am governed on all these subjects by customary law, where is the Hindu Law that governs me ? I find that there is one subject that is not put down as such, namely, maintenance with which this Hindu Code deals. It is not put down in the Customary law that I am governed by the usage on that subject also. I was submitting that I have three subjects on which I have certain objections and the Sikhs do not wish that they should be forced to be governed by the Hindu Code that is being proposed here in respect of them. First I referred to marriage and the dissolution and divorce connected with it. 3 p.m.

873 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL [mr. Speaker in the Chair ] Sir, so far as the Sikhs are concerned they have a very simple form of marriage. We might call it sacramental or dharmic marriage. It is known as Anand marriage. It is a simple and secular form of marriage. The couple sit down in the presence of the Guru Granth Saheb, they take a vow that they will remain united for ever—so long as they are alive, of course—and prayers are offered. Of course I might be confronted with this that this would be covered, and that it is not touched by the Hindu Code. But there are some implications which I am afraid would really affect me. There are certain degrees of relationship which are prohibited from marrying each other and these are strictly observed in all civilised societies. But so far as our society is concerned the list is not very large. Marriage between cousins has often been allowed. There have been many instances of marrying father’s sister’s daughter or mother’s sister’s daughter and they have not been considered as within the prohibited degree. And I tell you that you are driving your society towards that direction. We are far ahead of you. You are coming to that way. Do not be surprised at that. Now that you are proposing to give a share to the girl you are sure to come that way. You will have to march towards that direction. An Hon. Member : What about Sikh Jats ? Sardar Hukam Singh : What I am submitting relates mostly to Sikh Jats. The custom that I am talking of prevails mostly in Jats and Jats observe that. Ninety per cent of the Sikhs are agriculturists and live in villages. I was asking now that you propose to pass this legislation, by which the daughter shall have a share. Here I might make my position clear and nobody need feel perturbed. I am for a share for the girl. I am not opposed to it. But when you proposed that, you will have to take the risk that this long list of prohibited degrees shall continue diminishing and shall contract as time passes. I suppose the present list is not as long as it used to be under the strict Hindu Law. And it is sure to contract as time passes. Shri Tyagi : It will come nearer home. Sardar Hukam Singh : Surely. You cannot keep the two things apart. When you take this from the Muslim law you will have to permit cousins and other near relations to be outside the prohibited degrees. There is no doubt about it. Be prepared for it. You will have to march near it. You cannot keep away from it.

874 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Now that you are asking me to come in, that I should have this dharmic marriage, the implication would be that these prohibited degrees would be there. While there is freedom for me to marry such relations as I have described, this would create a ban on me. And it would not be only for the future. There have been so many such marriages and all of them would be invalid. Though you have provided in clause 21 that I can get my marriage, my dharmic marriage, registered as civil marriage, but think of the instances and their number. We shall have to run to the courts or to the Registrar to get them validated. Do you want me, an old man, to get my marriage registered now ? Dr. Ambedkar : Do you want to marry again ? Mr. Speaker : Order, order. Sardar Hukam Singh : This Code would create a doubt because the girl that I might have married might, according to you, be within the prohibited degrees. What would happen then ? I enquire from the Hon. Minister what would happen to that marriage. Shri Tyagi : And to your children also. Sardar Hukam Singh : Yes, certainly. They will be “ illegitimate” unless I get my marriage registered as a civil marriage now, at this age ! And the Hon. Minister wants all those persons now, at this advanced age, to run to the Registrar and get their marriages registered as civil marriages. Shri Tyagi : As he has done himself ! Sardar Hukam Singh : Then again there is a marriage that is usually known amongst the agriculturists of my part as karewa marriage or widow’s marriage. No distinction is made in the present Code as regards that. What will happen to that marriage, because we will have either the sacramental or dharmic marriage or the civil marriage— nothing beside it. The simple manner in which the karewa marriage is performed might look peculiar to some hon. Members here. There is no ceremony : it is a secular institution altogether. The man and the would be wife sit together, a chaddar is spread over them and sweets are distributed and they become husband and wife. I do not think, Sir, the Hon. Minister can point out to me any provision by which such marriages would be recognized. He is making this Code more cumbersome. . . . Pandit Thakurdas Bhargava : If it is a bigamous marriage then difficulty will arise.

875 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL Sardar Hukam Singh : May I enquire with your permission from my hon. Friend what form of marriage would that be. Would that be a Dharmic marriage without any ceremony. ( Interruption) I do not agree with him and that would not be a dharmic marriage. Anyhow, I do not want to enter into a controversy here. I come to my next point, that is, adoption. What I am going to say might look somewhat surprising to some of my hon. Friends and in this respect also I claim that we are much in advance of the rest of the country, so far as this adoption is concerned. Dr. Ambedkar : You are always in advance of everybody. Sardar Hukam Singh : I will tell you just now and then you would agree with me that we are much in advance on that subject too. As has been just pointed by my hon. Friend, Pandit Thakurdas Bhargava, it is the customary appointment of a heir. It has nothing to do with religion. There is no horror of incest. We are not eager to create sons to offer us pindas. Shri Hussain Iman (Bihar) : Are there Pindas ? Mr. Speaker : Let him proceed further. Sardar Hukam Singh : We do want that we might have a heir to succeed to the property. Dr. Ambedkar : Why do not you allow the property to go to the State ? Sardar Hukam Singh : Then it might go to the Hon. Minister and that we do not want to do. Therefore, this is a most secular institution. There are no restrictions as to the age, caste or any ceremonies. A simple declaration is there and perhaps it was observed, last time too I made a remark that a man can adopt another older than himself. The adopter might adopt a man of his father’s age. There is no harm in that ; he might be married and he might have several children. This institution you would not find anywhere. I fail to understand, Sir, if all these usages and customs are effaced, what is going to happen to these institutions, to these customs that we love very much, these traditions to which we have been accustomed for so many centuries. Then, Sir, I would cite another peculiar instance, which might interest some of my hon. Friends and I invite the attention of the Hon. Minister particularly to this point. Mr. Speaker : The hon. Member may proceed with his speech. Sardar Hukam Singh : I wanted the Hon. Minister to pay attention to a subject which is very interesting.