DRAFT CONSTITUTION 417
ARTICLE 19
- Mr. Vice-President : Amendment No. 596, Dr. Ambedkar.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Bombay : General) : Sir, I beg to move :
“That in clause (2) of article 19. for the word “preclude” the word “prevent” be substituted.”
This is only for the purpose of keeping symmetry in the language that we have used in the other articles.
†The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : Sir, we have adopted a directive asking the State to endeavour to evolve a uniform civil code, and this particular amendment is a direct negation of that directive. On that ground also, I think this is altogether inappropriate in this connection.
Mr. Vice-President: Would you like to say anything on this matter, Dr. Ambedkar ? I should value your advice about this amendment being in order or not, on account of the reasons put forward by Mr. Santhanam.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I was discussing another amendment with Mr. Ranga here and so …………
The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : Amendment No. 612 about personal law is sought to be moved.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : This point was disposed of already, when we discussed the Directive Principles, and also when we discussed another amendment the other day.
‡Mr. Vice-President: I have on my list here 15 amendments, most of which have been moved before the House. I should think that they give the views on this particular article from different angles. We had about seven or eight speakers giving utterance to their views. I think that the article has been sufficiently debated. I call upon Dr. Ambedkar to reply.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. Vice-President, Sir, I have nothing to add to the various speakers who have spoken in support of this article. What I have to say is that the only amendment I am prepared to accept is amendment No. 609.
*CAD, Vol. VII, 6th December 1948, p. 826.
† Ibid., pp.. 829-30.
† Ibid., p. 838.