Dr. Ambedkar's Writings and Speeches Volume 14 PDF

D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 1 Babasaheb Dr. B.R. Ambedkar (14th April 1891 - 6th December 1956) Courtesy : Artist Prof. Pramod Ramteke, Chitrakala Mahavidyalya, Nagpur D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 2 D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 3 Significance of the Hindu Code No law passed by the Indian Legislature in the past or likely to be passed in the future can be compared to it (Hindu Code ) in point of its significance. To leave inequality between class and class, between sex and sex which is the soul of Hindu society, untouched and to go on passing legislation relating to economic problems is to make a farce of our Constitution and to build a palace on a dung heap. This is the significance I attached to the Hindu Code. —Dr. Ambedkar on ‘Hindu Code’ D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 4 D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 5 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Vol. 14 PART ONE (Sections I to III) Edited by Vasant Moon D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 6 Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar : Writings and Speeches Vol. 14 (Part-1) First Edition by Education Department, Govt. of Maharashtra : 6 December, 1995 Re-printed by Dr. Ambedkar Foundation : January, 2014 ISBN (Set) : 978-93-5109-064-9 Courtesy : Monogram used on the Cover page is taken from Babasaheb Dr. Ambedkar’s Letterhead. © Secretary Education Department Government of Maharashtra Price : One Set of 1 to 17 Volumes (20 Books) : ` 3000/- Publisher: Dr. Ambedkar Foundation Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Govt. of India 15, Janpath, New Delhi - 110 001 Phone : 011-23357625, 23320571, 23320589 Fax : 011-23320582 Website : www.ambedkarfoundation.nic.in The Education Department Government of Maharashtra, Bombay-400032 for Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Source Material Publication Committee Printer M/s. Tan Prints India Pvt. Ltd., N. H. 10, Village-Rohad, Distt. Jhajjar, Haryana D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 7 Minister for Social Justice and Empowerment & Chairperson, Dr. Ambedkar Foundation Kumari Selja MESSAGE Babasaheb Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the Chief Architect of Indian Constitution was a scholar par excellence, a philosopher, a visionary, an emancipator and a true nationalist. He led a number of social movements to secure human rights to the oppressed and depressed sections of the society. He stands as a symbol of struggle for social justice. The Government of Maharashtra has done a highly commendable work of publication of volumes of unpublished works of Dr. Ambedkar, which have brought out his ideology and philosophy before the Nation and the world. In pursuance of the recommendations of the Centenary Celebrations Committee of Dr. Ambedkar, constituted under the chairmanship of the then Prime Minister of India, the Dr. Ambedkar Foundation (DAF) was set up for implementation of different schemes, projects and activities for furthering the ideology and message of Dr. Ambedkar among the masses in India as well as abroad. The DAF took up the work of translation and publication of the Collected Works of Babasaheb Dr. B.R. Ambedkar published by the Government of Maharashtra in English and Marathi into Hindi and other regional languages. I am extremely thankful to the Government of Maharashtra’s consent for bringing out the works of Dr. Ambedkar in English also by the Dr. Ambedkar Foundation. Dr. Ambedkar’s writings are as relevant today as were at the time when these were penned. He firmly believed that our political democracy must stand on the base of social democracy which means a way of life which recognizes liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life. He emphasized on measuring the progress of a community by the degree of progress which women have achieved. According to him if we want to maintain democracy not merely in form, but also in fact, we must hold fast to constitutional methods of achieving our social and economic objectives. He advocated that in our political, social and economic life, we must have the principle of one man, one vote, one value. There is a great deal that we can learn from Dr. Ambedkar’s ideology and philosophy which would be beneficial to our Nation building endeavor. I am glad that the DAF is taking steps to spread Dr. Ambedkar’s ideology and philosophy to an even wider readership. I would be grateful for any suggestions on publication of works of Babasaheb Dr. Ambedkar. (Kumari Selja) D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 8 Collected Works of Babasaheb Dr. Ambedkar (CWBA) Editorial Board Kumari Selja Minister for Social Justice & Empowerment, Govt. of India and Chairperson, Dr. Ambedkar Foundation Shri Manikrao Hodlya Gavit Minister of State for Social Justice & Empowerment, Govt. of India Shri P. Balram Naik Minister of State for Social Justice & Empowerment, Govt. of India Shri Sudhir Bhargav Secretary Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Govt. of India Shri Sanjeev Kumar Joint Secretary Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Govt. of India and Member Secretary, Dr. Ambedkar Foundation Shri Viney Kumar Paul Director Dr. Ambedkar Foundation Shri Kumar Anupam Manager (Co-ordination) - CWBA Shri Jagdish Prasad ‘Bharti’ Manager (Marketing) - CWBA Shri Sudhir Hilsayan Editor, Dr. Ambedkar Foundation D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 1 PREFACE Maharashtra has been fortunate in having a long tradition of social reforms. Just as in Europe, Christianity inaugurated the Era of equality by preaching that a prince and a pauper are equal in the eyes of God, saints like Dnyaneshwar, Namdeo, Tukaram, Gora Kumbhar and Chokhamela brought about a great social change by preaching the Gospel of compassion, equality and lib- erty of worship. Caste barriers were annihilated. The rise of the Maratha power under Shivaji the Great demonstrated that a popu- lar hero could be crowned as a King. Shivaji heralded the dawn of political equality. These saints of Maharashtra preached the Gos- pel of democracy in religion, breaking down the barriers of classes and castes. The Warkari cult did not recognise caste. Members of the Warkari cult in procession, marched together eating the same food in the spirit of the true brotherhood. They shared the com- mon quest for God. The Bhakti movement of the Warkaris broad- ened and deepened the freedom of worship. Article 25 of the Constitution permits such freedom. The reforms introduced by Dr. Ambedkar in Hindu Law have been accepted by and large. He laid the foundation of the common Civil Code for the Hindus and the principle is capable of extension to other sections of the Indian society. However, reforms in religious beliefs and practices are slow and voluntary. It is hoped that the guidance given by Dr. Ambedkar in this respect will be availed of by leaders of different communities and they will initiate a dialogue within the country so as to facilitate reforms in laws. Reforms, religious and social, had stirred the Maharashtrian society. The soil was fertile for further changes within the frame- work of the Hindu Law. Over the years, the Hindu Law under- went transformation, opening the channels of communication. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 2 (vi) DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Dr. Ambedkar, by codifying the Hindu Law in respect of marriage, divorce and succession, rationalised and restored it to its glory. Dr. Ambedkar has preserved marriage as sacrament and promoted the growth of family values. Consistent with the Constitution, the Hindu Law as modified permits people to practice and profess their religion. But as Dr. Ambedkar categorically stated, “the state has retained all along the right to interfere in the personal law of any community in this country”, and therefore, there is a sound basis for liberalisation of personal laws so as to broaden the freedom of the individual and the unity of the country based on such freedom. (MANOHAR JOSHI) Bombay : Chief Minister, November 28, 1995. Maharashtra State. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 3 EDITORIAL Present volume contains speeches of Dr. Ambedkar in the codification of the Hindu Law. The Bill to amend and codify certain branches of the Hindu Law was referred to the Select Committee consisting of eminent jurists and parliamentarians viz. Sir Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar, Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand, Shri H. V. Kamat, Smt. G. Durgabai and many others. The list of the members of the Select Committee reads like the directory of eminent Indians. Before the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 of which the Bill is a precurser, the Hindu Law was uncodified in a large measure, though certain branches of it were the subject of legislative intervention viz. Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937. Scattered to innumerable decisions of the Indian High Courts and also of the Privy Council, it was a source of legislation and therefore, it was necessary to give a definite shape and form to the Hindu Law by consolidation and codification. The principles of codification covered (1) right to property, (2) order of succession to the property, (3) maintenance, marriage, divorce, adoption, minority and guardianship. The two schools of Hindu Law viz. Mitakshara and Dayabhag, created and sustained inequality. The Mitakshara school treated the property of the Hindu as belonging to a co-parcenary in which by reason of birth sons, grand-sons and great-grand sons had interest. The property passed by survivorship under Mitakshara whereas Dayabhag recognised the rule of personal interest and capacity to dispose of the property having interest in it. Further the Bill had the object of making the widow, the daughter and the widow of a pre-deceased son eligible to inherit property. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 4 (viii) DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES It is not fair to reproduce the reasons for introduction of the Bill nor it is necessary to refer to the provisions of the law relating to marriage and divorce as the reader will find them competently explained in the speeches of the distinguished members who along with Dr. Ambedkar contributed to the enfranchisement of women in the Indian sub-continent. Dr. Ambedkar himself had explained lucidly the reasons for consolidation and codification. The chaotic condition of the Hindu Law was reduced to neat propositions in the form of judicial prenouncements and codification was the legislative recognition of the judge made law. ‘Law must be stable and yet it must change to answer the felt needs of changing times’, to paraphrase the words of Benjamin Nathan Cardoze in his ‘Nature of judicial process’. The unanimous approval of the Constituent Assembly to the principles of the Bill is as much a tribute to the forensic skills of Dr. Ambedkar as to the training and temperament of those who were the members of the Constituent Assembly. The principles of the Bill are in harmony with the constitutional philosophy of equality of men and women. Needless to add that the Bill was a part of social engineering via law. It was by the standard of the time a revolutionary measure. The debates in the Constituent Assembly provoked sharp reactions. However, by providing such sharp reactions, freedom of speech fulfilled its high purpose viz. to invite discussions and to raise disputes. Now that the dispute is over and women have become as assertive as men, if not more, younger generation may find delightful reading and may well imagine what blessings of freedom they enjoy under our noble Constitution. Though the proposal for consolidation and codification of the Hindu Law passed through opposition, eventually it came to be approved and applauded. This could be possible as there was sustained attempt to educate public opinion and to ameliorate the condition of D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 5 EDITORIAL (ix ) women. A list of the Acts modifying the Hindu Law relating to women would be instructive :— (1) The Caste Disabilities Removal Act, 1850. (2) The Hindu Widow Remarriage Act, 1856. (3) The Indian Succession Act, 1925. (4) The Native Convert’s Marriage Dissolution Act, 1866. (5) The Transfer of Property Act IV of 1882 as amended by Act XX of 1929. (6) The Indian Majority Act, 1875. (7) The Guardian and Wards Act, 1890. (8) The Transfer of Property (Amendment) Supplementary Act XXI of 1929. This Act amends the Madras Act of 1914 and 1921 and the Hindu Disposition of Property Act, 1916 which related to transfers and bequests in favour of unborn person. (9) The Hindu Gains of Learning Act, 1930. This Act makes all acquisitions by means of learning the separate property of the acquirer. (10) The Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act XVIII of 1937. So also it may be noted that the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, supersedes the rules of the Hindu Law of Evidence. The Indian Penal Code, 1859 supersedes the whole of the Hindu Criminal Law. The passing of the measure by the Parliament was, therefore, the slow but sure effect of these legislative measures and was part of the social engineering which found its fulfilment in the Indian Constitution. This volume comprises complete debate on the Hindu Code Bill introduced by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly on 11th April 1947. The Bill was moved for referring to the Select Committee on 9th April 1948. This was followed by debate which continued for more than 4 years and still remained inconclusive. In the words of Dr. Ambedkar, it was D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 6 (x) DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES killed and died unusept and unsung. This was probably the longest discussion on any single Bill in the free India’s Parliament. Dr. Ambedkar felt that the Government and the party in power i.e. Congress were not eager to clear the Hindu Code. He, therefore, tendered his resignation on 27th September 1951 to the Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru but continued to participate in the Parliamentary debates till 10th October 1951 on the request of the Prime Minister. In his letter he expressed that he attached greatest importance to the Hindu Code Bill and would be prepared to undergo any strain on his health to get the Bill through. He wanted the Bill to be taken- up on top priority basis on 16th August and be finished by the 1st of September 1951. However, the opponents of the Hindu Code continued obstructive tactics and delayed the passing of the Bill. Dr. Ambedkar ultimately submitted his statement of resignation on 10th October and left the House in anguish. The whole discussion on the Hindu Code right from its introduction in the Constituent Assembly till 10th October 1951 is divided into 4 sections in this Book. Section I consists of the introduction of the Bill for referring it to the Select Committee. Dr. Ambedkar’s speech explaining the salient features and the speeches of Dr. Pattabhi Sitarammaya, Naziruddin Ahmad, Smt. Hansa Mehta, Shri Ram Sahay, Dr. B. V. Keskar, Begum Aizaz Rasul and Shri R. K. Chaudhary are also included. This part covers discussion between 17th November 1947 to 9th April 1948. Second section of this volume is the draft Hindu Code as prepared by Dr. Ambedkar and the then existing Hindu Code as amended by the Select Committee. This is presented here with a view to have a glimpse of Dr. Ambedkar’s original idea about the reform of the basic structure of the Hindu Law. Third Section comprises general discussion on the Hindu Code. Some members questioned the authority of the Constituent Assembly to pass this radical legislation, some D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 7 EDITORIAL (xi) objected to the reform of divorce and women’s right to inherit property and some discarded the Bill totally as interference in the religious matters of the Hindu Society. However, progressive elements in the Assembly supported the move and praised Dr. Ambedkar for his courageous measure. The fourth section covers the clausewise discussion on the Hindu Code Bill. Although the volume is part of Dr. Ambedkar’s writings, his attempt for reforming the Hindu Society through the introduction of Hindu Code is the most important event of his life. Discussion on the Hindu Code and Dr. Ambedkar’s role played through the debates thereon are very useful for the students of Socio-religious study of the Hindu Society. The members of the Committee therefore felt that the whole discussion should be brought out in this volume rather than mere speeches of Dr. Ambedkar alone. It is hoped that this compilation will be useful to the scholars, laymen and the historians alike to appreciate the freedom now available to different sections of the Hindu society. This note will be incomplete without placing on record my grateful thanks to: * Principal Manohar Joshi, the Chief Minister of Maharashtra and Shri Dattatraya Rane, Minister for Higher Education, Maharashtra State, who have shown keen interest in the thought of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar and encouraged this project; and * Shri Navjeevan Lakhanpal, Secretary, Higher and Technical Education, Government of Maharashtra, whose guidance and encouragement has been always of a great help ; The work of Editing of this volume has been made possible by the ready help, support and co-operation I have received : * From Shri P. S. Bhogal, Director and Shri E. R. D’Souza, Archivist of the State Archives Department, Bombay, as well D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 8 (xii) DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES as Shri D. S. Chavan, Librarian, Vidhan Bhavan Library, and Shri S. S. Rege and Shri Shrikant Talwatkar, Librarian Siddharth College, Bombay, who made me available the required books i.e. official copy of the Hindu Code to reproduce the relevant material for this volume ; * From Shri B. M. Ambhaikar, of Bombay and Shri D. C. Ahir of Delhi whose suggestions have immensely helped me in this volume ; Shri D. K. Ramteke, who spared his copy of Government of India’s Hindi Book on Hindu Code and Prof. Pramod Ramteke, who spared his painting of Dr. Ambedkar for this volume ; * From Shri P. S. More, Director ; Shri P. L. Purkar, Deputy Director and Shri A. C. Sayyad, Manager of the Government Printing and Stationery, Government of Maharashtra for their careful printing of this volume. * From Dr. Keshavrao Phalke and Shri T. B. Sen, Deputy Secretaries and Shri J. M. Abhyankar, Deputy Director of Education, Greater Bombay, for their help in administrative matter, and the staff working under me comprising of Shri Ravindra Sutar, Smt. Sumitra Nevrekar and Smt. Shalaka Tambe for their zeal and faithful assistance in typing, proof reading and other office work entrusted to them. Bombay: (VASANT MOON) November 28, 1995. Officer on Special Duty. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages Preface : Hon’ble Shri Manohar Joshi, Chief Minister of Maharashtra... (v) Editorial... (vii) PART ONE SECTION I Hindu Code Bill referred to Select Committee (17th November 1947 to 9th April 1948)... 1-42 SECTION II The Draft Hindu Code Bill by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar along with the then existing Hindu Code as amended by the Select Committee... 43-226 SECTION III Discussion on the Hindu Code after return of the Bill from the Select Committee (11th February 1949 to 14th December 1950)... 227-786 PART TWO SECTION IV Hindu Code Bill (Clause by Clause Discussion)... 789-1312 ANNEXURE I Statement by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar in Parliament in explanation of his resignation from the Cabinet... 1315-1327 ANNEXURE II Hindu Code Bill and its purpose—By Dharmadeo Vidyavachaspati in Hindi... 1329-1373 INDEX... 1375-1385 D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\PREFACE MK AMIT 9-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 10 D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 1 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 1 SECTION I HINDU CODE BILL REFERRED TO SELECT COMMITTEE 17th NOVEMBER 1947 TO 9th APRIL 1948 D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 2 2 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 3 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 3 *HINDU C ODE The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Minister for Law): Sir, I move: “That the Bill to amend and codify certain branches of the Hindu Law be continued.” Mr. Speaker : Motion moved : “That the Bill to amend and codify certain branches of the Hindu Law be continued.” Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad (West Bengal: Muslim): May I know the present stage of this very important Bill ? I understand there has been a considerable amount of agitation among our Hindu friends over it and it is better we have a picture of the stage at which the Bill is at present. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It was only introduced. No further stage was taken. Shri R. V. Dhulekar (U. P.: General): In the new set up we should have no Hindu Law and Muslim Law. We should have a general Law and therefore.... Mr. Speaker : Honourable Member is speaking on the merits. He will have an opportunity of saying it when the Bill comes before the House. At present the only question is whether the Bill should be continued or not continued. Shri R. V. Dhulekar : So, Sir, I oppose, it should not be continued. Mr. Speaker: The question is : “That the Bill to amend and codify certain branches of the Hindu Law be continued.” The motion was adopted. *HINDU INTERCASTE MARRIAGE REGULATING AND VALIDATING BILL Shri Mohan Lal Saksena : (U. P. : General): Sir, since the Law Minister has informed me that he proposes to make a motion for reference of the Hindu Code to a Select Committee during the present session, I do not want to move this motion. Mr. Speaker : Do I understand that the Honourable Member does not want to make a motion now, but he wishes to keep it alive? Shri Mohan Lal Saksena : Yes, Sir, In case the Law Minister does not bring in his motion, I may have to move mine. * Constituent Assembly of India (Legislative) Debates [Hereinafter called C.A. (Leg.) D.J, Vol. I, 17th November 1947, p. 41. * C.A. (Leg.) D., Vol. I, 11th February 1948, p. 599. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 4 4 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES *HINDU MARRIAGES VALIDITY BILL Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava (East Punjab : General); Sir, I beg to move for leave to introduce a Bill to provide that marriages between Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and their different castes and sub-castes are valid. Mr. Speaker : The question is: “That leave be granted to introduce a Bill to provide that marriages between Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and their different castes and sub-castes are valid.” The motion was adopted. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : Sir, I introduce the Bill. *HINDU CODE * The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Minister for Law) : I beg to move: “That the Bill to amend and codify certain branches of the Hindu Law, be referred to a Select Committee consisting of Shri Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar, Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand, Shri M. Anantthasayanam Ayyangar, Shrimati G. Durgabai, Shri L. Krishnaswami Bharathi, Shri U. Srinivasa Mallayya Shri Mihir Lal Chattopadhvay, Dr. P. S. Deshmukh, Shrimati Renuka Ray, Dr. P. K. Sen, Babu Ramnarayan Singh, Shri Kishorimohan Tripathi, Shrimati Ammu Swaminadhan, Pandit Balkrishna Sharma, Shri Khursheed Lal, Shri Brajeshwar Prasad, Shri B. Shiva Rao, Shri Baldeo Swarup, Shri V. C. Kesava Rao and the Mover, with instructions to report not later than the last day of the first week of the next session of the Assembly and that the number of members whose presence shall be necessary to constitute a meeting of the Committee shall be five.” Sir, it is a matter of great pity and also of great regret both for myself and I believe also for the members of the House that so important a measure as the codification of Hindu Law should 4 P. M. have come for discussion before the House almost at the fag end of the session. We have, according to the arrangement announced by the Honourable speaker this morning, to conclude the debate on this motion by 7 O’clock from now, with an interval of half an hour. I think it my duty that within the limitations in which we are placed I should give more time to Members of the Legislature to express their views on the various points raised by this Bill and I should like to contribute my own mite to the fulfilment of this wish which I have expressed. The only way by which I could do it is to set an example by myself to make my opening speech as brief as *C.A. (Leg.) D., Vol. II, 26th February 1948, p. 1288. *C.A. (Leg.) D., Vol. IV, 9th April 1948, pp. 3628-33. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 5 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 5 I can possibly make. I regret it very much to have been required to come to that decision because this Bill is of such a vast character that if one were to expound it fully and thoroughly, and to explain its provisions as against the background of the existing Hindu Law, I have not the slightest doubt that such an effort would take not less than four or five hours. But that is impossible, and the House therefore, will forgive me if I confine myself to placing before it the most salient points which mark a departure from the existing law as we know it today. Sir, this Bill, the aim of which is to codify the rules of Hindu Law which are scattered in innumerable decisions of the High Courts and of the Privy Council, which form a bewildering motley to the common man and give rise to constant litigation, seeks to codify the law relating to seven different matters. Firstly, it seeks to codify the law relating to the rights of property of a deceased Hindu who has died intestate without making a will, both female and male. Secondly, it prescribes a somewhat altered form of the order of succession among the different heirs to the property of a deceased dying intestate. The next topic it deals with is the law of maintenance, marriage, divorce, adoption, minority and guardianship. The House will see what is the ambit and the periphery of this Bill. To begin with the question of inheritance. Under this head the Bill enacts a new principle, at least for certain parts of British India. As many members who are lawyers in this House will know, so far as inheritance is concerned, the Hindus are governed by two different systems of law. One system is known as Mitakashara and the other is known as Dayabhag. The two systems have a fundamental difference. According to Mitakshara, the property of a Hindu is not his individual property. It is property which belongs to what is called a coparcenary, which consists of father, son, grandson and great grandson. All these people have a birth-right in that property and the property on the death of anyone member of this coparcenary passes by what is called survivorship to the members who remain behind, and does not pass to the heirs of the deceased. The Hindu Code contained in this Bill adopts the Dayabhag rule, under which the property is held by the heir as his personal property with an absolute right to dispose it of either by gift or by will or any other manner that he chooses. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 6 6 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES That is one fundamental change which this Bill seeks to make. In other words, it universalises the law of inheritance by extending the Dayabhag rule to the territory in which the rule of the Mitakshara now operates. Coming to the question of the order of succession among the heirs, there is also fundamental difference of a general character between the rule of the Mitakshara and the rule of the Dayabhag. Under the Mitakshara rule the agnates of a deceased are preferred to his cognates; under the Dayabhag rule the basis of heirship is blood relationship to the deceased and not the relationship based on cognatic or agnatic relationship. That is one change that the Bill makes; in other words, here also it adopts the rule of the Dayabhag in preference to the rule of the Mitakshara. In addition to this general change in the order of succession to a deceased Hindu, the Bill also seeks to make four changes. One change is that the widow, the daughter, the widow of a pre-deceased son, all are given the same rank as the son in the matter of inheritance. In addition to that, the daughter also is given a share in her father’s property; her share is prescribed as half of that of the son. Here again, I should like to point out that the only new change which this Bill seeks to make, so far as the female heirs are concerned is confined to daughter; the other female heirs have already been recognised by the Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act of 1937. Therefore, so far as that part of the Bill is concerned, there is really no change in the Bill at all; the Bill merely carries the provisions contained in the Act to which I have made reference. The second change which the Bill makes so far as the female heirs are concerned is that the number of female heirs recognised now is much larger than under either the Mitakshara or the Dayabhag. The third change made by the (Bill is this that under the old law, whether the Mitakshara or the Dayabhag, a discrimination was made among female heirs, as to whether a particular female was rich or poor in circumstances at the death of the testator, whether she was married or unmarried, or whether she was with issue or without issue. All these consideration which led to discrimination in the female heirs are now abolished by this Bill. A woman who has a right to inherit D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 7 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 7 gets it by reason of the fact that she is declared to be an heir irrespective of any other considerations. The last change that is made relates to the rule of inheritance in the Dayabhag. Under the Dayabhag the father succeeds before in preference to the mother; under the present Bill the position is altered so that the mother comes before the father. So much for the order of succession of heirs to a deceased male Hindu. I now come to the provisions in the Bill which relates to intestate succession to females. As Members of the House who are familiar with Hindu Law will know, under the existing law the property held by a Hindu female falls into two categories; one is called her stridhan, and the other is called “woman’s property”. Taking first the question of stridhan, under the existing law stridhan falls into several categories; it is not one single category, and the order of succession to the stridhan of a female under the existing law varies according to the category of the stridhan; one category of stridhan has a different law of succession than another category and these rules are alike both as to Mitakshara as they are to the Dayabhag. So far as stridhan is concerned the present Bill makes two changes. The one change it makes is that it consolidates the different categories of stridhan into one single category of property and lays down a uniform rule of succession; there is no variety of heirs to the stridhan in accordance with the different categories of the stridhan—all stridhan is one and there is one rule of succession. The second change which the Bill seeks to make with regard to the heirs is that the son also is now given a right to inherit the stridhan and he is given half the share which the daughter takes. Members will realise that in formulating this Bill and making changes in rules of succession, it is provided that while the daughter is getting half the share in the father’s property, the son is also getting half the share in the mother’s property so that in a certain sense the Bill seeks to maintain an equality of position between the son and the daughter. Coming to the question of the “woman’s estate”, as members of the House will know under the Hindu Law where a woman inherits properly she gets only what is called a ‘life estate’ She can enjoy the income of the property, but she cannot deal with the corpus of the property except for legal necessity; the property must pass after D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 8 8 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES the death of the woman to the reversioners of her husband. The Bill, here again, introduces two changes. It converts this limited estate into an absolute estate just as the male when he inherits gets an absolute estate in the property that he inherits and secondly, it abolishes the right of the reversioners to claim the property after the widow. An important provision which is ancillary to the rights of women to inherit property contained in this Bill is a provision which relates to Dowry. All members of the House know what a scandalous affair this dowry is; how, for instance, girls who bring enormous lot of property from their parents either by way of dowry or stridhan or gift are treated, nonetheless, with utter contempt, tyranny and oppression. The Bill provides in my judgment one of the most salutary provisions, namely, that this properly which is given as dowry to a girl on the occasion of her marriage shall be treated as a trust property, the use of which will inure to the woman and she is entitled to claim that property when she comes to the age of 18, so that neither her husband nor the relations of her husband will have any interest in that property; nor will they have any opportunity to waste that property and make her helpless for the rest of her life. Coming to the provisions relating to maintenance, there is mostly nothing new in this part of the Bill. The Bill prescribes that the dependents of a deceased shall be entitled to claim maintenance from those who inherit his property either under the rules of intestate succession or who inherit the property under his will. There are 11 different kinds of dependants, enumerated in this Bill. I believe, at least speaking for myself, it is an unfortunate thing that even a concubine is included in the category of dependants, but there it is; it is a matter for consideration. The liability to maintenance is cast upon those who take the estate of the deceased. As I said, there is nothing very new in this part of the Bill. There is another part of the Bill which is important and it relates to the rights of a wife to claim separate maintenance when she lives separate from her husband. Generally, under the provisions of the Hindu law, a wife is not entitled to claim maintenance from her husband if she does not live with him in his house. The Bill, however, recognises that there are undoubtedly circumstances where if the wife has lived away from the husband, it must be for causes beyond her control and D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 9 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 9 it would be wrong not to recognise the causes and not to give her separate maintenance. Consequently the Bill provides that a wife shall be entitled to claim separate maintenance from her husband if he is (1) suffering from a loathsome disease, (2) if he keeps a concubine, (3) if he is guilty of cruelty, (4) if he has abandoned her for two years, (5) if he has converted to another religion and (6) any other cause justifying her living separately. The next topic to which I wish to make a reference concerns the question of marriage. The Code recognises two forms of marriages. One is called “sacramental” marriage and the other is called “civil” marriage. As members will know, this is a departure from the existing law. The existing Hindu law recognises only what is called “sacramental” mar- riage, but it does not recognise what we call a “civil” marriage. When one considers the conditions for a valid sacramental marriage and a valid registered marriage, under the Code there is really very little difference between the two. There are five conditions for a sacramental marriage. Firstly, the bridegroom must be 18 years old, and the bride must be 14 years old. Secondly, neither party must have a spouse living at the time of marriage. Thirdly, parties must not be within prohibited degree of relationship. Fourthly, parties must not be sapindas of each other. Fifthly, neither must be an idiot or a lunatic. Except for the fact that similarity of sapindaship is not a bar to a registered marriage, so far as other conditions are concerned, there is no difference between the sacramental marriage and the civil marriage. The only other difference is that the registered marriage must be registered in accordance with the provisions in the Bill while a sacramental marriage may be registered if parties desire to do so. Comparing the rules of marriage contained in the Bill and the existing law, it may be noticed that there are three differences which the Bill makes. One is this, that while the existing law requires identity of caste and sub-caste for a valid sacramental marriage, the Bill dispenses with this condition. Marriage under the Bill will be valid irrespective of the caste or sub-caste of the parties entering into the marriage. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava (East Punjab : General) If the marriage is between persons belonging to different castes, will it be valid? The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Let me proceed with my speech. If the Honourable Member puts the question while making his speech, I shall reply to it. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 10 10 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES The second provision in this Bill is that identity of gotrapravara is not a bar to a marriage while it is under the existing law. The third distinctive feature is this, that under the old law, polygamy was permissible. Under the new law it is monogomy which is prescribed. The sacramental marriage was a marriage which was indissoluble. There could be no divorce. The present Bill makes a new departure by introducing into the law provisions for the dissolution of marriage. Any party which marries under the new code has three remedies to get out of the contract of marriage. One is to have the marriage declared null and void; secondly, to have the marriage declared invalid; and thirdly, to have it dissolved. Now, the grounds for invalidation of marriage are two: One, if one party to the marriage had a spouse living at the time of marriage, then such a marriage will be null and void. Secondly, if the relationship of the parties fell within what is called the ambit of prohibited-degrees, the marriage could be declared null and void. The grounds for invalidation of the marriage are four. First, impotency. Second, parties being sapinda. Third, parties being either idiotic or lunatic. Fourth, guardian’s consent obtained by force or fraud. In order not to keep the sword of dissolution hanging on the head, the Bill, in my judgment very wisely, has provided a limit to an action for invalidation. It provides that a suit for the invalidation of marriage must be filed within three years from the date of the marriage; otherwise the suit will be barred and the marriage will continue as though there was no ground for invalidity. The Bill also provides that even though the marriage may be invalidated and may be declared invalid by a court of Law, the invalidation of marriage will not affect the legitimacy of the children born and they would continue to be legitimate just the same. Then coming to the question of divorce, there are seven grounds on which divorce could be obtained. (1) desertion, (2) conversion to another religion, (3) keeping a concubine or becoming a concubine, (4) incurably unsound mind, (5) virulent and incurable form of leprosy, (6) venereal diseases in communicable form and (7) cruelty. Coming to the question of adoption, there again, most of the rules embodied in the Bill are in no way different from the rules obtaining under the present law. There are two new provisions in this part dealing with adoption. Firstly, under the Code, it will be necessary D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 11 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 11 for the husband if he wants to make an adoption to obtain the consent of his wife and if there are more than one, at least the consent of one of them. Secondly, it also lays down that if the widow wants to adopt, she can only adopt if there are positive instructions left by the husband authorising her to adopt and in order to prevent litigation as to whether the husband has, as a matter of fact, left instructions to his wife, the code provides that the evidence of such instructions shall be either by registered deed or by a provision in the will. No oral evidence would be admissible, so that chances of litigation are considerably mitigated. The Code also provides that the adoption may also be evidenced by registration. One of the most fruitful sources of litigation in this country is the question of adoption. All sorts of oral evidence is manufactured, concocted; witnesses are suborned; widows are fooled; they one day declare that they have made one adoption and subsequently they make an avowal that they have not adopted and in order that all this litigation may be put a stop to, the Code makes a salutary provision that there may be registration of adoption by a Hindu. Then there is the question of minority and guardianship, the last subject which the Bill seeks to codify. There is nothing new in this part of the Code and, therefore, I do not propose to say anything so far as that part in the Bill is concerned. As members will realize, the points which arise out of this Bill for consideration and which are new are these: First, the abolition of birth- right and to take property by survivorship. The second point that arises for consideration is the giving of half-share to the daughter. Thirdly, the conversion of the women’s limited estate into an absolute estate. Fourthly, the abolition of caste in the matter of marriage and adoption. Fifthly, the principle of monogamy and sixthly the principle of divorce. I have sought to enumerate these points separately and categorically because I felt that in view of the limited time we have at our disposal, it would be of help to the Members of this House if I could point out what are the points of debate on which attention may be concentrated. These departures which are made in this Bill undoubtedly requires justification, but I think it would be a waste of time if at this stage undertook any defence of the departures enacted by this Bill. I propose to hear Honourable Members as to what they have to say on the points which I have enumerated and if I find that D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 12 12 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES it is necessary for me to enter upon a justification, I propose to do so in the course of my reply. Sir, I move. Mr. Chairman : Motion moved : “That the Bill to amend and codify certain branches of the Hindu Law, be referred to a Select Committee consisting of Shri Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar, Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand, Shri M. Anantthasayanam Ayyangar, Shrimati G. Durgabai, Shri L. Krishnaswami Bharathi, Shri U. Srinivasa Mallayya, Shri Mihir Lal Chattopadhyay, Dr. P. S. Deshmukh, Shrimati Renuka Ray, Dr. P. K. Sen, Babu Ramnarayan Singh, Shri Kishorimohan Tripathi, Shrimati Ammu Swaminadhan, Pandit Balkrishna Sharma, Shri Khurshed Lal, Shri Brajeshwar Prasad, Shri B. Shiva Rao, Shri Baldeo Swarup, Shri V. C. Kesava Rao and the Mover, with instructions to report not later than the last day of the first week of the next session of the Assembly and that the number of members whose presence shall be necessary to constitute a meeting of the Committee shall be five.” * Dr. B. Pattabhi Sitaramayya (Madras : General): Mr. Chairman, Sir, I rise at an early moment in order to catch your eye in the hope that I shall have the ear of the House while having the eye of the Chairman. This is a very interesting piece of legislation which has been presented to this House, a piece of legislation for which the country has been whiting for long. This country having passed under the rule of foreigners for nearly a thousand years has not been able to effect that social progress which is incidental to changes in society in the world and which takes place imperceptibly by force of everchanging custom. Custom is a force which is generally patronized, appreciated and recognized by the rulers. Unfortunately, this country has had no kings for a long time to whose inspiring example the subjects could look up for any changes in society. In the West, even today, if a social change is required all that is to be done is for the King to initiate that change and all the people will follow as a matter of course. You might have heard the story of Edward the Eighth, who, when he was Prince of Wales, went to a far distant island and having heard from the people that their occupation was gone because of the change of fashions, asked what the fashion was which had ruined the occupation. They said formerly they were manufactures of straw hats and now straw hats had given place to felt hats and therefore, they had lost their occupation. The next day he appeared in public on a ceremonial occasion with a straw hat and * C.A. (Leg.) D., Vol. IV, 9th April 1948, pp. 3633-39. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 13 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 13 the straw hat industry was at once revived. That is the power of the king; he is not merely the political head of a State, but head of society, the exemplar, the mentor and the monitor. As such he evaluates the customs age long, traditional and hoary—sanctified by age and it lies in his power to change that custom one way or the other. But what has been our fate since the British rule had come into existence? So long as the Muslims were ruling this country, they copied our customs and we copied their customs; there was an inter-mixture and inter- currency of customs and therefore, some measures of social progress. But after the British came, when they came to be looked upon as untouchables and even unapproachables by the vast majority of the population of this country, the situation was that they were afraid to touch the customs of this country with the longest pole. They were afraid of any interference with the socio-religious structure which was a delicate structure almost like a chemical balance and bore the repercussions of the smallest change coming from abroad and from adventitious sources. They were afraid that such repercussions would be ruinous to the stability of their empire in this country and therefore, they adopted the plausible and seemingly reasonable altitude of not interfering with the religion or the custom of the land. In this manner the Judges of the High Courts always helped to register the custom as it had existed for long centuries behind, and never registered a change in the custom as marking a progress in society. Thus custom became petrified and when custom became petrified, progress became impeded altogether, and for a hundred and fifty years our society has not been able to make any progress. If social evils had been pointed out by missionaries at one stage they were so pointed out in a spirit of carping criticism rather than in a spirit of progressive helpfulness. And as time advanced and English education took root and as democracy spread its tentacles and got firm hold upon the affections of the people another change came into being. The very missionaries and clergymen who were so keen on educated Indians throwing off the trammels of their orthodoxy became suddenly conservative and critical of the drastic changes which the English educated people were taking to with a certain amount of irresponsible case. They began to inquire whether after all these people who were so readily taking to these changes meant to take to these changes or whether they were D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 14 14 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES simply throwing away by way of relaxation the rigid customs of age and of society. They did not like it because the spirit of reform is always destructive of their own power. In the encouraging of reform themselves they saw the dangers to their rule and the missionary saw at once that he was encouraging a certain amount of rebellious spirit in the nation. Now Brahmoism was looked upon as the saving factor in this country, but Brahmoism was thereupon condemned by the missionary because it provided a hailing house for the reform spirit of the nation. Thus the misssionary himself became conservative. Englishmen became conserva- tive, custom became rigid, society became petrified and congealed and coagulated, as it were, in a chamber which was not wide or expansive, thus, we have suffered, so much so that the issue of a post-puberty marriage in the Punjab was declared illegitimate by the High Court. This was the last straw that broke the back of progressive society. Immediately, there was an attempt to break the bones of custom, by trying to reform the marriage law. Act 3 of 1870, popularly known as the Brahmo Marriage Act, required, however, a certain denial statement, “I repudiate that I am a Hindu or a Muslim or a Christian or a Parsee or a Jain or a Jew.” This obnoxious declaration was associated with the provisions of that Act. Therefore, it did not become popular. Later on the Sarda Act came into being; fortunately it has set the seal of authority upon that piece of social reform which the heads of orthodoxy were imposing and were impeding. A new era has begun. The Indian National Congress which had started in 1885 had till 1919 associated with it as an ancillary and an auxiliary a social reform organisation which dealt with the social evils of the country and suggested various legislative measures also. But there was a non willingness on the part of the British Government to effect those legislative changes and as time progressed there was also an unwillingness on the part of society to accept the social reform at the hands of foreigners in this country. Fortunately, Sir, today we have survived those times, I am glad I am alive to see the age when on the initiative of the National Government a progressive measure of reform, comprehensive in outlook, far-reaching in its result, medical in its nature, is being put forward, which embraces the rights of women in regard to inheritance, in regard to marriage, in regard to property, in regard to divorce, in D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 15 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 15 regard to personal freedom. And I hope, as time advances we shall have more and more of reforms in this direction to which this measure points today. Let us start with the full rights that have been conferred upon the woman after the death of her husband. In our Shastras it has been briefly described that the woman is the bond slave of her father when she is young, to her husband when she is middle aged and to her son when she is a mother. Of course all epigrams, aphorisms, proverbs, platitubes and truisms are half truths. There is a core of truth about them. We sometimes find it useful to quote these things but there is a core of untruth also about them and we should try to understand the full significance of all these. According to the measures before us, a woman will have property in her own right and be able to dispose of her property. I have been trying to see whether the Law Minister would explain when these rights would come into force. Suppossing after the passing of this measure a man dies and his widow inherits his property: what are her rights compared with the rights of a widow whose husband died one year ago? The latter possesses limited estates. What is the change sought to be introduced? Can widows with only limited estates convert those limited estates into full right estates with the right to give away, to mortgage, to sell and so on, irrespective of whether there is legal necessity in the interests of the family or not? That is a point which I have been trying to understand by turning up the pages of the measure before me but I have not been able to understand it. I dare say, in his reply the Mover of the Bill will be so good as to elucidate the point. The ‘rights’ of the daughter is a matter on which I have been feeling very keenly. When speaking to English people or when discussing Indian conditions and society with savants and scholars coming from abroad, I have never been tired of praising my own system. If you wish to understand the basis of a system, or appraise any of its social customs or practices, you must not lake it in its present degenerate condition. But you must take it in all its pristine purity and glory. I look upon child marriage as a splendid institution as our ancients conceived it because they conceived it good for the average man and the average woman to be married. And this marriage is a D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 16 16 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES good thing because the child has to be grafted into another family and grafting should take place while the plant is young and not when the plant has become old. But then, the conception itself has changed. Now we live in an age when it is much more happy to be bachelors and criticise others’ wives than to marry and beget children. Therefore, our ideals have changed and therefore, the principle of child marriage may not be binding upon us. Each one is at liberty to live his or her own life according to her or his pleasure and there is no obligation imposed by society and social conditions have changed. Under the circumstances we should not indeed be the victims of past tradition, past customs, past events. But how shall we deal with the facts which exist at the present day: so many daughters and so many sisters are not merely vegetating but they are rotting in their homes. While we praise our systems to others, we cannot shut from our own eyes the fact that our sisters and daughters and other relations are rotting in their own homes unable to get any relief. Latterly I have suggested a love strike for our women. That is the only remedy which I have thought out and I have been able to think it out as a remedy directed against this custom. I read a book called “The Impregnable Women” while I was in the Ahmednagar Fort. There was a war in England and all the women wanted to resist the war. How could they resist? The men are greedy. The men are pugnacious and blood-thirsty. They want to fight. They want to measure the strength of the tiger and ape it them with the strength of the ape and tiger in others. Therefore, the women said : let us have a love strike. No young maiden would speak to her lover; no wife would speak to her husband; no mother would speak to her son. The men were boycotted. There was no social life between men and women until the war about to be declared was cancelled. They said they would not mix with these people. But, I will not push the matter further. I suggest that if in a village, or town, or mohalla, there is ill-treatment of a single woman, all our wives had better have a club and go away from our houses and live there for 24 hours and very soon the recalcitrant husband will be brought to his senses. All the men will bring their moral influence to bear upon this man and they will tell him: “What the hell are you doing? All our homes are D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 17 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 17 broken up and they will remain broken unless you take back your wife.” You may laugh now. But what else are you going to do? Are you going to prosecute the man? He will bring up his charges. Are you going to prosecute the wife? She will bring a number of charges. You should not enter into the quarrels between husband and wife. Once I found a husband beating his wife. I went and interfered. The woman turned round and came down on me like a wolf on the fold. She said: “It is my husband who is beating me. Who the hell are you to interfere?” Therefore, it is not possible for you easily to interfere in domestic affairs. After all the Kowravas and Pandawas when they fought, they used to say : “we are 100 against 5 but against a third party they said we are 100 plus 5” So in these domestic quarrels both are against us when we meddle in their affairs. So if the daughter is to be happy she must be able to inherit property in her own right I find that the position of a wife is most obsequious. Her sister’s son comes. Her brother comes. She wants to give them a good present. But the wife has to wait upon the goodwill of her husband in order to get even Rs. 5. After all this man has his moods. And he may be in a good mood or a bad mood. So she must have some properly which she can call her own. Would you wish her to get rid of some of her jewels? The idea is fantastic. No woman will sell away her jewellery even after her husband’s death because after her husband’s death that jewellery stands as the symbol of the unity of herself and her deceased spouse. I know it. I have spoken to many women. Mr. Chairman : Does the Honourable Member want to speak for a longer time? Dr. B. Pattabhi Sitaramayya : I am sorry. I was not looking at the time. I would like to continue. Mr. Chairman : The House will now adjourn for half an hour and reassemble at Half Past Five of the Clock. The Assembly then adjourned till Half Past Five of the Clock in the afternoon. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 18 18 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES The Assembly re-assembled at Half Past Five of the Clock with Mr. Speaker (The Honourable Mr. G. V. Mavalankar) in the Chair. Dr. B. Pattabhi Sitaramayya : Mr. Speaker, I was dealing with the question of a share for the daughter from the patrimony. I am in the habit of twitting my lady friends by asking them “Why do you want a share ? You are going to become the queens of another home. My wife has become the queen of my home and she is the unquestioned head of the family. She is getting the keys of her own safe and so will you get the keys of the safe of another home.” But that is not enough. It is not enough to be at the mercy of a husband, however dear that husband may be. A woman must have her own right and when she has her own right she is better respected by the husband and although the doctrine of self-effacement on the part of the woman has been carried on in our country and society for ages long, yet the fact remains that in the modern day the conception of self-respect has completely altered the position. One must be able to say that she has a little money to deal with in her own right. Hitherto I have had a little doubt as to whether we are not depriving all the sons of the share to which they are legitimately entitled if the daughter also comes in for her share. Now the Bill before us gives a share in the stridhana to the sons to the same extent to which the daughter is given a share in the father’s property. That largely equalises things and warns all parents that they should have an equal number of sons and daughters. That is the only condition that is imposed upon us and that will be able to balance our economy. We must also balance our progeny. But there is another difficulty. After all as things stand, it looks as though we cannot say hereafter in marriage invitations that my daughter is being given in marriage to so and so, there will be a new language adopted. My daughter and so and so will marry each other. That is the new language adopted. Still the fact remains that except in Malabar, where the husbands go to their wives’ houses, here our daughters generally go to their husbands’ houses. Of course the position in Malabar is entirely the reverse of our conditions and it will take hours to deal with the question. I am not going to stray into that very interesting topic. Yet the fact remains when the daughter goes away from her father’s home, the wonder is whether she is able to enjoy the property that is given to her by her parents. I have asked my Muslim sisters and brothers as to whether the age-long custom D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 19 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 19 of giving a half share to a daughter, half of the son’s, is really practically, enjoyed. They said that except in towns it is not enjoyed. Somehow or other the brother does the sister in the eye and knocks off her property and gives her some compensation. That may or may not be so but the fact remains that there is that supreme danger and the greatest danger in this matter is that when you recognise the fact that 80 per cent of pattadara are able to pay only Rs. 10 as tax on 2½ acres of wet land or four or five acres of dry land, where on earth is there a chance for them to give a share to the daughter, which she can carry with her or which she can enjoy. I doubt very much from the practical side but on the theoretical side at any rate the thing is unquestionably quite correct. When thus you have raised the status of women in society and when you have conferred upon her the right to absolute property then you must also give her certain rights which self-respect engenders in her naturally. The conditions of marriage are not conditions of slavery. It is all very well to say that marriages are made in heaven and that once a husband always a husband or once a wife always a wife. It is a very good rule but at the same time there are conditions like drunkenness, persistent cruelly, immoral character on the part of the husband, diseases like leprosy, impotency and various other conditions which are enumer- ated by the Law Minister which justify a separation of the husband from the wife. If a man feels free and has the right to stray abroad and to whatever he wants to do, if he can marry a second time when the first wife is alive, then of course it must be equally open for the wife also to marry a second husband while the first one is alive. Imagine that condition. I sometimes ask friends when I see a young man dressed in hat, boot and suit and by the side goes a nicely clad Hindu lady dressed in all the beautiful folds of the Hindu saree “Will you kindly reverse your dresses? Will the husband wear a dhothi and the wife a hat and skirt of a European woman, how will it look?” It will look absurd, as absurd as when you sign your name in your mother tongue over an English document. Once an officer asked me not to sign in Telugu over an English document. Then I said that the reverse situation of an English signature over a Telugu document is equally incongruous. Therefore, we must give full freedom to our sisters, mothers and daughters and enable D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 20 20 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES them to have judicial separation, if necessary and divorce. But I trust and hope that the distinguished ladies who are here and who have been labouring for years in the cause of rights for women will preach and propagate the fact and the doctrine that divorce is a reserve fund not to be drawn upon for current expenses, that divorce should be the ultimate resort for causes which are otherwise irremediable. Public opinion, personal influence, family persuasion, all these are there. You must remember that the quarrels between a husband and wife during the day are generally closed up in the night and therefore, there is not much chance of perpetuating these quarrels. We should not make much of them. In America there is a State called Indianopolis, where the porter cries “Indianopolis Station, Twenty minutes for divorce.” The divorce court is in the railway station itself. Any husband and wife having a quarrel in the train, could apply for divorce and get it before the train departs. That should not be our position. Our divorce must be a kind of reserve fund like the jewellery on a woman’s person, always to be drawn upon under conditions of the greatest necessity and never to be lightly utilised. The question of adoption is a very difficult question, the Honourable Law Minister has assimilated the Mitakashara practice to that of the Dayabhaga. I suppose Dayabhaga obtains in Bengal and Mitakashara in South India and in Bombay there is a law called Mayuka, according to which amongst the non-Brahmins it is not necessary for the husband to give permission and the widow can adopt a child. I had read a judgment of the Privy Council some ten or twelve years ago. I want that law to be copied in other parts, where such adoption is not permissible according to Mitakshara. After all why does a family adopt a boy ? To perpetuate the family. Is it not the right of the widow to perpetuate the family as much as of the deceased husband? Is it only the exclusive right of the man who is deceased to perpetuate the family. If a boy could inherit the property, why should it not be open to the mother to adopt the boy in her own right apart from the written or the registered permission of her husband either by a document or by a will. In English law oral wills are permissible; whereas written wills require two signatures, oral wills require no such thing. After all, by oral wills properties worth lakhs and crores are alienated. “All to wife” on a newspaper bit is held to be a valid D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 21 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 21 will. Then why should it not be permissible in law for a husband to give permission orally to his wife in order that she can adopt. These are points which the Select Committee will have to give its consideration to. (An Honourable Member: “Why permission at all?”) That is my contention. If permission is necessary why not oral permission? Relax the law regulating adoption as much as possible. Then there is the question of monogamy. I am very sorry to note that young girls in their blooming youth do not understand all the conditions that must be observed in regard to the proper selection of match for marriage. We have an ancient saying which when rendered into English says : You must consider the prosperity, good looks, tradition, pedigree, culture—all these things you must consider before you select a husband. But now it has become rather common—and a very distinguished authority has confirmed the statement—that educated girls have the habit of picking readymade husbands who have already got a wife and five or six children. Why does this happen? It is due to the want of education during their college days about these matters. Somehow these things are considered taboo and everybody shrinks from talking about them although a lot of private talk is inevitably done in regard to these matters. The forbidden fruit has never remained untasted. Therefore, it is necessary that we provide teaching in regard to these matters. I once spoke to a certain friend of mine—he has given freedom to his daughter with regard to the selection of his son-in-law—and in the course of his conversation he told me a story which I later related to his daughter and son-in-law much to their amusement. She was asked by him, “Do you wish to marry so and so, a boy who is handsome, good- looking, is well educated, passed B.L., or is in the profession, is the son of a rich man and has an upstair house” and she said “No, father, has he got no motor car and elctric lights? If he has got a motor car and electric lights, no matter to whom you give me in marriage I am willing to marry him”. Such are the temperaments, tendencies and trends of untutored youth and therefore, it is very necessary that we should teach them about all these matters. It is not enough to make laws: but it is necessary to propagate these laws and propagandize these laws in order to educate our young girls in the direction of monogamy. That is very necessary. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 22 22 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES I welcome every aspect of this Bill. If there are defects which are obvious here and there I daresay they will be remedied by all the distinguished personalities whose names have been mentioned in con- nection with the formation of the Select Committee. I have taken a little more time than necessary. Perhaps, I can hold forth for hours together. I have got the experience of 68 years covering a careful study of all kinds of conditions and I would have liked very much to continue except for the fact that today’s time is limited and we must apply the guillotine at 7 O’clock and some of our sisters and brothers are very anxious to speak and I am also anxious to hear them. * Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad (West Bengal : Muslim): Sir, I am in the most unfortunate position of having been charged with the communi- cation of certain views which have been entrusted to me by some of my friends. They are some criticisms of the Bill. I must however assure the House that personally I would fully support the Bill. Its provisions are largely in accord with the laws which prevail in my own community and the Bill tries to do absolute justice to all regardless of practical results. It is however, with some amount of nervousness that I have risen to speak. When I find that sturdy members of the House who would have spoken against the Bill have quailed before a powerful array of five distinguished members of the fair sex, ready to stand to their guns, little courage can I muster in giving out the views which I am charged to communicate. Sir, the Honourable the Law Minister has not told us anything about the opinions that have been collected and printed in the pamphlets which have been circulated to us. They were made available to us at a very late stage. If it was desired that Honourable Members should read them, analyse them and tell the House the result of their analysis I think the time is too short. There is a pamphlet the Report of the Hindu Law Committee which contains a large number of opinions. I am sorry this was not circulated amongst the members. (An Honourable Member : “It was circulated”). It was not. This book was not circulated. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It was kept in the Library for a very long time. *C.A. (Leg.) D., Vol. IV, 9th April 1948, pp. 3639-42. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 23 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 23 Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : It was not kept in the Library for a very long time. It has been placed in the Library very recently. I had to buy it from the market. It is only recently that some copies were kept in the Liberary. Prof. N. G. Ranga (Madras : General): What is it? Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : When an Honourable Member like Professor Ranga asks ‘what is this?’ it only shows... Prof. N. G. Ranga : I asked what is it you are referring to. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: The Report of the Hindu Law Committee. Prof. N. G. Ranga: That is, the Rao Committee. Its Report has been before the public for a year. Mr. Speaker: Whatever it be, the Honourable Member may proceed. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad: The Report has been published only recently. I submit that in this Report there is a dissentient minute of the late Justice D. N. Mitter. He has collected a large number of opinions against the Bill. I do not wish to read them. He has classified them province by province and subject by subject. There is no time to deal with them, but he has said that the principles of the Bill are opposed by the entire Hindu community, that is the orthodox section of the community. I have studied as carefully as it was possible for me within the short time available, the recent opinions on the Bill obtained by the Government and circulated to us. I find there is a volume of opinion against the Bill. In fact, at the time when the Committee was hearing evidence the evidence in Bengal was also all one way. Now in the opinions circulated I find the opinion in West Bengal is all one way. It is clearly against the Bill. What is remarkable is that there is an opinion by the Secretary of the Government of Bengal in the Ministry of Law. That opinion is to be found in paper No. 4, opinion No. 17. That opinion is against the Bill. It says that this is not a proper time to take the Bill. (An Honourable Member : ‘When was that ’?) It bears no date. It has been circulated only recently—five or six days ago. In fact it says that the Bill is of far-reaching importance and enough consideration has not been given to the opinions expressed. The House will be pleased to consider the different categories of D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 24 24 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES objections. One is that, this Bill should not be considered by a mixed Legislature consisting of members of various communities. It is for this reason that I am particularly anxious to speak as it was feared that men of different communities will rather support the Bill and spoil the cause of orthodox Hinduism. It is for this reason that I hasten to declare that I am not supporting the Bill as the Hindu community is much against it. One of the objections is that the introduction of women’s shares would introduce litigation. There are many opinions that this would lead to excessive fragmentation that it will lead ultimately to the destruction of that joint family system amongst the Hindus which has saved the community from the destructive effects of fragmentation from which the Muslims most terribly suffer. It is said also that the Hindu law—the Vedic literature and the post Vedic literature known as the “Srutis” and the “Smritis” have a divine origin. But the present Bill goes, it is said, against the very structure, the very religious basis and the very religious structure of the Hindus. It is on this ground that is seriously opposed. It is argued that you cannot regard all this religious law, all this sacred literature as so much nonsensical superstition. They have kept the Hindu society alive for ages though it is quite true that society cannot remain stagnant. It must move. But it must move cautiously and with experience. The present Bill makes a change with a sweeping stroke. Another point that has been made apparent in these objections is that the present Legislature was elected on one issue, namely the attainment of inde- pendence. The present Bill, which is really of a very sweeping and complicated character, and its principles have not been before the public and it would therefore, be better to wait to digest opinions and to pass a constitution and hold elections making this a definite issue before the public. It will then be seen whether the public at large really desire it. In fact it is said that the Bill was not properly circulated. Many associations got only a few days’ time or even a few hours time to consider and give their opinions. In these circumstances it is argued that the Bill should not be taken into consideration at this stage. Then there is another important aspect of the question. The Bill attempts to make the law applicable to Hindus uniformly throughout D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 25 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 25 India, but it has been pointed out that the effect of uniformity will not be attained in view of the shortness of time. It is well known that agricultural land is beyond the purview of this House. It is a provincial subject. Whatever law we may pass will affect only non-agricultural land, whatever that expression may mean. That expression is also vague. It has been defined in the Income Tax Act for the purpose of taxation and this Bill as well as many other Acts have taken that as the basis. There may be lands which lie midway between agricultural and non-agricul- tural lands. In fact, apart from this distinction, a large proportion of our property—about 80 per cent—consists of culturable land. Thus it is perfectly clear that the Provinces will have to deal with them and they may deal with them in a different manner and some provinces may not deal with them at all. And then again we have the acceded States. Though Hindu Law is to be the same—and it is attempted to make it uniform—the States people may legislate or may not legislate, and in case they legislate they may make different provisions. In fact the Provincial Governments and the States will be largely guided by local custom and local opinion and I believe it will be extremely difficult for the West Bengal Legislature to pass a law which is so much against the opinion of that Province. It will therefore come to this that if we pass this law the result would be that in the case of a man having two classes of properties—a house or building and certain agricultural land—one set of law will apply to non-agricultural land and another set of law will apply to agricultural land. Whatever law you pass, it should be uniform and it would be far better to collect opinions from the Provincial Governments and to ask for their consent to give jurisdiction to this House to pass a comprehensive legislation as we have done in some cases. If comprehensiveness and completeness is the objective, it is better that the Central Legislature should be armed with their consent and deal with it on an all-India basis, and it would also be a proper tiling to ask the States to co-operate in this matter. These are some of the difficulties. As we are working against time, it is impossible, as the Honourable the Law Minister has pointed out, to deal with even some of the salient features of the Bill. It is also impossible to deal with some of the objections except from the border point of view. One thing that strikes me is that the opinions have not been very carefully D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 26 26 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES studied. We have not got any analysis of these opinions collected point by point and supplied to the members to enable them to deal with them. It is very difficult for private Members to read the opinions at a high speed and to analyse them, store them in different compartments of their brains and use them in a classified form. On a matter of such great importance as this, it would have been extremely desirable for the Honourable Minister’s Department to classify the opinions, as was done before in such cases, and circulate them to enable members to consider each point in the light of the objections or support in respect of each of them. Shri L. Krishnaswami Bharati (Madras : General): It is there in the Report of the Law Committee, classified, analysed and all that. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I am grateful for the remark, but the opinions of which I am speaking have been received and circulated after the report. In fact the opinions which have been circulated by the Department were received only recently and they are on the Bill as it is. But the opinions collected in the Report of the Hindu Law Committee were collected before the drafting of the Bill, that is during the enquiry stage. The Honourable Member has missed the point that the opinions I am speaking of are not those publised in the Report. They were separately printed and circulated. These are the opinions which I talk of. I think these should have been carefully analysed and printed along with the various points. Sir, I do not wish to labour the matter. Personally I am in favour of the Bill, but these are some of the objections which I have been asked to put forward by certain of my friends. That is the reason why I have put them before the House. There are a large number of other points, but they are of a minor nature. In view of the shortness of the time at our disposal I think I should cut short my speech. Then again legislation should rather follow public opinion. It should follow rather than create or override public opinion, and I am giving a quotation from a famous authority, the father of modern politics, Edmond Burke. He said on a famous occasion: “To follow, not to force the public inclinations, to give direction, a form and technical dress and a specific sanction to the general sense of the community is the true end of legislation.” D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 27 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 27 But it has been pointed in the objections that there is no public opinion behind this Bill. It is pointed out in some of the objections that only some of the educated section and some of the ultra-modern section are behind it, but the masses, most of whom are ignorant, are indifferent to it and it has not been fully circulated in the way a subject of this importance should have been. In these circumstances, I submit this for the consideration of the House that it would have been better if the House gave directions to the Select Committee in matters of a disputed nature, but in this case we are sending the Bill without any directions. I should seek a little clarification from the Honourable Minister for Law. With these few words, Sir, I hope the points raised in the objections would be carefully considered and due decisions would be reached. With regard to the personnel of the Select Committee, nothing could be said. The ablest, the most authorititave and most well-informed of the Members have been taken in it and I hope and believe that they will do full justice to the objections raised against the Bill. * Shrimati Hansa Mehta (Bombay : General): Mr. Speaker, Sir, I congratulate the Honourable Minister for bringing this Bill even at this late hour of the Session. I also congratulate or 6-00 P.M. rather I express my sense of gratitude to Sir B. N. Rau and his colleagues for the great labour they have bestowed on the Report on which these recommendations are based. This Bill to codify the Hindu Law is a revolutionary Bill and though we are not quite satisfied with it, it will be a great landmark in the social history of the Hindus. But since this Bill was drafted many things have happened and one of the biggest things that has happened is the achievement of our political freedom. Our new Constitution is in the making; we have already agreed upon the fundamental principles on which this new Constitution is to be drafted. The new State is going to be a democratic State and democracy is based on the equality of individuals. It is from this point of view that we have now to approach the problems of inheritance and marriage etc. that are before us. The Select Committee will therefore, have to see that the new Bill is drafted on these principles. *C.A. (Leg.) D., Vol. IV, 9th April 1948, pp. 3642-44. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 28 28 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES It is true that the Code has abolished the six discrimination with regard to inheritance. A woman is recognised as an heir and she is also entitled to enjoy her property in her full rights; that is, the Code has abolished the limited estate of the woman. Even then we feel that it does not go far enough. A daughter who is recognised an heir inherits the property, but she inherits half the share of the son. This violates the principle of equality on which we have again and again said that our new Constitution is going to be based—a Constitution which aims to secure for the people of this country justice, social, political and economic. We, therefore, feel that the daughter should get an equal share in the property of her father with the son and the son also should get an equal share in the property of his mother with the daughter. It is also argued that a daughter gets her share from her father as well as from her husband, while the man does not get anything from his wife. We have already proposed, that is the Women’s Organisations have said, that the husband can also inherit the property of his wife in the same way that the wife inherits the property of her husband. In the Indian Succession Act the provision for the inheritance of husband is already there and I think we shall do well to copy that provision. People have argued, and the honourable friend who spoke before me has said that if a daughter is given her share, especially in a landed property, there will be fragmentation of land. But why is this argument trotted out in the case of a daughter’s inheritance? The same thing applies if a man has more than one son; if he has, say, four or five sons the land has to be fragmented; why is the argument not trotted out then, and only trotted out when the question of daughters inheriting the property comes up? The better thing would be that there should be law against fragmentation and the property should be sold if it goes below the prescribed limit. Or there is another alternative and that is collectivisation of the land. Then with regard to the question of marriage. I am gratified, and the women of India will be very happy to know, that the principle of monogamy is recognised, and if the Code comes into being then the principle of monogamy will be established. Sir, we have felt that all civilised nations, all civilised communities have adopted the principle of monogamy. Disrespect for women and all the atrocities that we hear of perpetrated on women are I think due to the fact D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 29 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 29 that this principle of polygamy exists. If we had monogamy, I do not think that women would have been abducted, married off or other things would have happened to them. This is a very wholesome principle and I hope the House will accept it. But with regard to some of the conditions of marriage there are one or two points that I would like to suggest. With regard to the marriage of the sapindas and the definition of sapinda, that requires a little revision; we are not quite satisfied with the definition that is given in the Code. Then again, we would like the age of marriage also to be a condition of a valid marriage. We have got the Sarda Act but that is not satisfactory; that has not satisfied the people because it has not been able to prevent child marriages; it is not effective. For that reason we would like the law to be more drastic. If we want sixteen to be the age of marriage, then it is very necessary that it should be included as one of the conditions of valid marriage and I would like the Select Committee to make that change. Then with regard to divorce, even that from the point of view of some does not go far enough. There is, however, one thing that I would like to bring to the notice of the members of the Select Committee and that is, the time given for desertion. If a man or a woman deserts his or her spouse, it has been provided, he or she can divorce her or him after five years. Five years is the period given in the Code. Even in “Narad Smriti” it is given that a childless woman should wait for three years. After three years she can marry again. So why not also bring that particular provision here that if a woman is childless, she need not wait till five years, but can divorce her husband after three years? If a woman has got children, then five years would be the right period, but for a childless woman three years would be a reasonable period. With regard to guardianship, here also the Code has not made any changes in the present law. Father is the natural guardian of the children. The mother does not come in. We would like the mother also to be a co-guardian of the children with the father. With regard to adoption, I think the whole chapter should be scrapped. We are a secular State. We want to be a secular State. Adoption in Hindu law is for religious purposes. Why should a secular State have anything to do with a religious custom? What we are D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 30 30 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES concerned with is whether adoption which is for religious purposes should be recognised by the State for purposes of inheritance. We say that it should not. If a child is adopted—whether it is a boy or a girl—we would like a daughter also to be adopted—if a child is adopted not for religious purpose, but for real purpose, i.e. that the parents want a child, then that child should have the same rights as the natural child. But, if there is adoption for religious purposes, only then I think that adoption should not be recognised for purposes of inheritance. These are some of the important points that I would like the Select Committee to consider. Speeches have been made, at least my Honourable friend Dr. Pattabhi has made a very long speech—praising all sorts of things about our past traditions. We have looked too much to the past. We must now look to the future. It is for the future generation that we are making this law. It is not for us, but for the future generation that is coming after us that this law will be applied. We have to look to the future conditions. After all, it is the conditions that determine the law. The law reflects the society. The law reflects the conditions in which the people live. We have to see that the future generation is not fettered by our own prejudices with regard to marriage or divorce or with regard to any other ideas that we may have today. I hope the Select Committee will consider that and produce a Bill which will be a great boon to the future Hindu society. * Shri Ram Sahai (Gwalior State): (English translation of the Hindi speech) Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have nothing to say particularly in reference to the Bill. I appreciate the manner in which this Bill has been drafted after keeping in view the needs of the present day Hindu Society. But, I find in it one or two defects, and I think it necessary to explain them for the consideration of the Select Committee. It has been laid down in Section 3(6) of Part IV of the Bill that in case of minor girls, the consent of her guardian must be obtained for her marriage. But so far as the question of declaring the marriage as invalid is concerned, it has been stated in Section 5 that it shall not be deemed to be invalid merely on the ground that such consent was not or had not been obtained. I fail to understand why it should not be deemed to be invalid when it has been expressely laid down * C.A. (Leg.) D., 9th April 1948, pp. 3646-47. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 31 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 31 that the consent of the guardian must be obtained. If the consent of the guardian had been obtained by means of fraud or force, that marriage can be deemed to be invalid, but if the consent had not been obtained at all, then why should not the marriage be deemed to be invalid? On the contrary it has been laid down that the marriage will not be deemed to be invalid merely for this reason. This is the one defect which should be considered by the Select Committee. Another point which I have to mention is in regard to ‘Succession’ and which Mrs. Hansa Mehta has just referred to in her speech. But I do not see eye to eye with the views expressed by her and am of the opinion that the manner in which the order of succession has been prescribed ignores the fundamental tenets of Dharam Shastras (Hindu Code of Law). I do not mean that the women should not be given any rights. I am of the opinion that, they have been given more rights here than men. I may point out that while a daughter gets a share both in her patrimony and the property of her husband’s family, there does not exist any such provision in this Bill which gives a man a share in the property of his father-in-law in addition to his patrimony. The men are thus, being subjected to the same injustice which has uptil now been done to the women. On the contrary, it can be argued that the share which his wife will get in her patrimony will make up the deficiency. But after considering objects underlying the Bill and the worldly conditions which have necessitated it, it is felt that the real problem remains unsolved. The reason for this is that the property which a woman acquires out of her patrimony shall be treated as her Stridhana and her husband will have no right to that, therefore, he will not derive any particular benefit from this. In this way, I submit this second point for consideration by the Select Committee which is very essential. I have yet to say another thing. Whatever may be the differences between the tenets of Dharam shastra and the present day conditions, I feel that we must follow the fundamental principles propounded therein; and keeping these in view we should decide all the issues. We should make only those changes which are considered necessary in view of the present conditions and trend of the society. We should not resort to introduce any change merely under excitement or in imitation of the western civilisation which may obstruct the growth of our society and produce some sort of difficulties that may not be desirable. D:\AMBEDKAR-13\VOL-14\V14-01 MK Ms 8-10-13 S.K.—05-12-2013 32 32 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Therefore, I would submit that those who are members of the Select Committee should consider these things and try to make necessary amendments. * Dr. B. V. Keskar (U.P.: General): Sir, I take this opportunity of congratulating the Honourable the Law Minister for bringing this Bill forward in spite of the inordinate delay that has taken place since this idea was first conceived. Sir there is no doubt that this is a very, very important Bill. As my Honourable friend, Dr. Pattabhi said, I do not think there has been any bill so radical and so revolutionary which is trying to change the very foundations of Hindu society, a society which has remained fossilized for the last thousand years. No doubt and it is to that that I want to draw the attention of this House and the members of the Select Committee, the very fact that this society has remained fossilized for the last thousand years and has developed such inertia, such lethargy, in the body politic that all manner and all kinds of forces will come forward to impede the passing of this Bill and passing of any Bill to change the existing structure of Hindu society. It is to this inertia, this lethargy of Hindu society which has probably become its bane, that the members of the Select Committee and the honourable the Law Minister will have to look to, because I have no doubt that until this Bill is passed, to the very last moment every sort of effort, will be made to see that this Bill does not become a law. The changes that a

Dr. Ambedkar's Writings and Speeches Volume 14 PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue