Vol. 15 · pages 631–635

614 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Mr. Chairman: I shall now read the amendment in the amended form and it will be clear to hon. Members. Amendment (of Dr. Ambedkar as above) moved. Shri Shiv Charan Lal: As I have pointed out previously with regard to clause 44 if the words “or such other officer as may be prescribed” are put after the words “Returning Officer” in paragraph 1, it will make the position clearer and easier; because at the time when the polling is going on it is very difficult to search out the returning officer and get the name changed. Shri Santhanam : The words “Returning Officer” are not there; the only words are “in the prescribed manner”. Mr. Chairman: The returning officer may not be found at every polling station. If this is inserted, that notice may be given to any other officer, it would be better. Shri Santhanam: Does it refer to the counting agent or the polling agent ? So far as the counting agent is concerned it has to be only to the returning officer. Mr. Chairman: The wording is “may appoint……another polling agent at any time before the poll is closed and shall forthwith give notice of such appointment in the prescribed manner to the Returning Officer.” This is not practicable. Either the mere giving on notice is sufficient or the notice may be given subsequently to the returning officer or such other officer or polling officer. Shri Santhanam: The words “in the prescribed manner will do”. The words “Returning Officer” may be dropped. Dr. Ambedkar : All these things have come upon me rather suddenly. I have not had time to go through them. This amendment was handed to me in the morning. I must safeguard my own position. My amendment may be accepted as it is subject to my right of reopening the question again in the House, if I find that the amendment creates any difficulty; or let the thing stand over. In that event the whole Bill must stand over now.

615PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES Mr. Chairman: Let it be held over, so that hon. Members may have the time to study the amendments. Clause 48 was added to the Bill. Dr. Ambedkar: I would request you to take up those clauses to which there are no amendments. Clause 49.—(Attendance of candidate at Polling Stations ) Mr. Chairman: The amendment to clause 49 (No. 383) is the same which the hon. Member has accepted. Shri Shiv Charan Lal: If he has no objection I will move it Sir. Dr. Ambedkar: I have no objection. Amendment made: In sub-clause (2) of clause 49, after the words “A candidate” insert the words “or his election agent”. —[Shri Shiv Charan Lal ] Mr. Chairman: The question is : “That clause 49, as amended, stand part of the Bill.” The motion was adopted. Clause 49, as amended, was added to the Bill. Clause 50 was added to the Bill. New Clause—50A Shri S. N. Das (Bihar): I have an amendment standing in my name suggesting a new clause 50a, regarding the candidate’s right to send election address post-free. Dr. Ambedkar: If I may intervene at this stage to save time. Sir, you will remember that last time this matter was discussed as to whether provision should not be made for permitting the candidate to send his election address post-free and I said that I would refer the matter to the Government and see whether such a thing could not be done. I thought the House at that time accepted my assurance without any specific amendment to that effect. Shri Sidhva: This should be held over.

616 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Dr. Ambedkar: No. it is not necessary. Mr. Chairman: Am I to understand that the hon. Mover does not want to move his amendment in view of the assurance given that the Hon. Minister will refer the matter to the Government ? Shri S. N. Das: In view of the assurance given by the Law Minister, I want to know whether I might be permitted to move my amendment. Mr. Chairman: There is no question of being allowed. He is at perfect liberty to move it. I only suggested to him whether, when the Hon. Minister has given an assurance, it is desirable to move it. Shri S. N. Das: It may be held over. Mr. Chairman: There is no question of being held over. The reply will not come from the Government within such a short time. Either he should move it or not move it. Shri S. N . Das: In view of the assurance given I do not want to move it. *Mr. Chairman: Then there is another amendment No. 385 in the printed list, standing in the name of Mr. Das suggesting new clause 50A. Shri S. N. Das : ( Hindi translation of Hindi Speech ) I want to say something on it. I submitted the suggestions because of the fact that in the election campaign propaganda wields great influence………My suggestion is that everybody should be given an equal opportunity so that he may go to the voters to explain to them the objectives for which he stands. Therefore, many candidates would be saved of expenses if railway facility was made available to them. That is the purpose of the suggestion I have put forth for the consideration of the House. If the House deems it proper, it may accept it, if not, it may reject it. Mr. Chairman: This amendment has not been moved and it has not been placed before the House. I would rather like that the reaction of the Hon. Minister may be known to the House. *P. D., Vol. 12, Part II, 21st May 1951, pp. 9189-90.

617PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES Dr. Ambedkar: I cannot agree to Government undertaking any such obligation at all. Mr. Chairman : Does the hon. Member want the amendment to be put to the House ? Shri S. N. Das: No Sir. Clause 51 (Death of cordinate) *Mr. Chairman: Amendment (of Shri S. N. Das) moved: For clause 51, substitute the following:— “51. Death of candidate before poll. — Whenever any candidate dies after being duly nominated and before the closing of the polls, all the election proceedings shall stand cancelled and all proceedings with reference to the election shall be commenced a new in all respect as if for a new election: Provided that the nomination of the deceased candidate was valid in the opinion of the Returning Officer: Provided further that no further nomination shall be necessary in the case of a candidate whose nomination was valid at the time of the cancellation of the election.” Dr. Ambedkar: I do not accept the amendment, but I would like to say that in view of the fact that the House has carried an amendment to sub-clause (2) of clause 35 with regard to withdrawal, there will have to be some small amendment made later on and I reserve the liberty to bring the matter up at a later stage Shri J. R. Kapoor: I take it that the proposal of the Hon. Minister is to hold over this clause. Dr. Ambedkar: I do not want to hold it over. The only point is that it will be necessary to add one more proviso. The point is this : that by amending sub-clause (2) of clause 35, it is now open for a candidate who had withdrawn to seek nomination if the contingency contemplated in clause 51 arises. Consequently a positive provision will have to be made in clause 51. That can easily be done by adding a proviso. *P.D., Vol. 12, Part II, 21st May 1951, pp. 9194-97.

618 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Mr. Chairman: As a matter of fact, in consequence of amendment No. 102 of Supplementary List No. 1 standing in the name of Shri Jaspat Roy Kapoor having been accepted, a consequential amendment is necessary and it is only for the purpose of having that consequential amendment that an opportunity is being sought to add that amendment afterwards. Shri J. R. Kapoor: I entirely agree with the Hon. the Law Minister that another proviso will have to be added, in view of the amendment which has already been accepted (Amendment No. 102). but apart from that, Sir, I think that the suggestion contained in the amendment just moved by my hon. friend Shri S. N. Das deserves serious consideration.…. There are two points contained in the amendment of Shri S. N. Das. His first contention is that if a particular candidate dies after scrutiny, but before the commencement of the poll, then the electorate should be given an opportunity for making another nomination in place of the candidate who is dead. This is an accepted principle. The next question that arises is that why should this principle be confined to cases of candidates who die only after scrutiny ? A candidate may die between the date of nomination and the date of scrutiny. Dr. Ambedkar: That is not the position. *Mr. Chairman : What is ‘due nomination’ ? Is it after or before security ? Dr. Ambedkar: In view of the fact that this clause will come back again to the House for the purpose of considering the proviso to which I have already referred, the whole thing might be held over. Mr. Chairman: Very well. Clause 51 is held over. *P.D., Vol. 12, Part II, 21st May 1951, p. 9197.