DRAFT CONSTITUTION 1043
With regard to the amendment moved by my Friend, Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad, I cannot understand why we should depart from the principle which has been laid down that any criminal matter which is lodged before the Privy Council before the appointed day may be heard by them for purposes of admission but they would be returned to the Federal Court for final disposal. He wants to make a departure from it but I have not been able to see that the reasons he has advanced warrant it. Therefore I cannot accept his amendment.
[Amendment of Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava was rejected and that of Naziruddin Ahmed was withdrawn. Clause 3 was added to the Bill.]
Clause 4
*The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move :
“That for sub-clause (b) of clause 4, the following sub-clauses be substituted : —
(b) any Indian appeal or petition on which the Judicial Committee has, after healing the parties, reserved judgment or order; or
(c) any Indian appeal which has been entered before the appointed day in the list of business of the Judicial Committee for the Michaelmas sittings of the year 1949 and which after that day is not directed to be removed therefrom by or under the authority of the Judicial Committee; or; and sub-clause (c) be re-lettered as sub-clause (d).”
What probably requires some explanation is sub-clause (c). Although we have stated in the main clause that business or cases entered upon the calendar for the Michaelmas term may be left with the Privy Council for disposal, it is not quite certain how many of them may remain undisposed of. Therefore, we propose to give permission to the Privy Council at the outset to say that, although a matter or a case is entered upon the cause list for the Michaelmas term, they will not be able to hear some of the matters, so that there may be no balance of pending cases left. In that event, those cases which the Privy Council directs that they will not be able to hear would also become automatically transferred to the Federal Court. It is to provide for that sort of contingency that I am adding this sub-clause (c) in terms of the amendment.
Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : Sir, I move :
“That sub-clause (c) of clause 4 be deleted.”
*CAD, Vol. IX, 17th September 1949, pp. 1599-1600.