z:\ ambedkar\vol-02\vol2-03.indd MK SJ+YS 21-9-2013/YS-8-11-2013 149
ON THE BOMBAY POLICE ACT AMENDMENT BILL 149
suggestion. After that there was no question of a person habitually engaged.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Better thoughts come again some times.
The Honourable Mr. K. M. Munshi: Sir, as I said, there is no question of dignity. The question is of difference of opinion, because if in every case we have to find out whether a man engaged is habitually engaged and not a man who is about to engage for the first time, he would escape. It would reduce the section to nullity and the Police Commissioner or the Government would also be reduced to a worse position than they are in under the existing section.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: My honourable friend must understand that no member on this side is opposed to taking powers to deal with gangs. In fact, the Opposition says : “Retain gangs”. If you want to have an amendment to deal with gangs. I am prepared to support it; I have not the least objection. I remember that the Leader of the Opposition said that power should be given to deal with gangs. But you are wanting power to deal with individuals and, therefore, we are putting these restrictions. If we are to deal with gangs, by all means, let somebody bring in an amendment and I for myself would support it, provided it is a reasonable amendment. Here, you are dealing with individuals.
Sir, if you like, we might adjourn for a short time and have a discussion.
Mr. S. H. Jhabvala: Sir, you see this shows the utility of a select committee I proposed.
The Honourable Mr. K. M. Munshi: Sir, I am quite willing, but it is no use adjourning for such a thing. I am trying to convince the honourable mover of the amendment that by putting the word “habit” there, he has reduced the operation of this section practically to a nullity. I cannot consider it further, unless he is willing to drop the word “habit”. If he wants to keep the word “habit” in the section, then the section becomes more or less useless. That is why, I say it is no use adjourning. There is no common ground.
Sir Ali Mahomed Khan Dehlavi: That describes the pucca mavali.
The Honourable Mr. K. M. Munshi: A pucca mavali is not necessarily a person engaged habitually in unlawful activities. He may be a mavali in the sense of a bully or a dada. Members are putting something in my mouth which I never said. When I said “pucca mavali” I did not say a person habitually engaged in unlawful activities. That is what you are attributing to me.
Sir Ali Mahomed Khan Dehlavi: Sir, I should like to say that when the Honourable Minister said “pucca mavali” we at once understood that there were a number of classifications of mavalis in his own mind.
The Honourable Mr. K. M. Munshi: That I agree ; there may be a series of mavalis.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Surely, the Honourable Minister does not want to deal with the case of a man who has done once a certain thing.
The Honourable Mr. K. M. Munshi: I gave the honourable member the