698 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes, as modified by the proviso.
Now, I come to clause (2) of my amendment. There you have got the general power given to Parliament to enlarge the criminal jurisdiction of the Supreme Court beyond the three cases laid down in my amendment. There was a point of view that the three cases mentioned in clause (1) of my amendment ought to be enough and that there ought not to be a door kept open for Parliament for enlarging the criminal jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and that sub-clauses (a), (b) and (c) ought to be the final limit of criminal jurisdiction of the High Court. Well, the only answer I could give is this : It is difficult to imagine what circumstances may arise in future. I think it would be better to believe it if a man said that there would be no circumstances arising at all requiring Parliament to confer some kind of criminal appellate jurisdiction upon the Supreme Court. Supposing such a contingency did arise and if the provisions of clause (2) of my new article were not there, what would be the position ? The position would be that the Constitution would have to be amended by the procedure we are proposing to lay down in a subsequent part of this Constitution. The question therefore is this : should we made it as hard as that, that the Parliament should also not have the power unless the Constitution is amended, or should we leave the position flexible by enabling Parliament to enact such law leave the time, the circumstances and the choice to the Parliament of the day ?
The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam (Madras : General) May I point out that under article 114 Parliament will still have the power to invest the Supreme Court with jurisdiction.
The Honourble Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I am afraid 114 does not deal with that matter. I have not got the copy with me; otherwise I would have replied. It is only with regard to the Union List.
The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : It deals with the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in relation to mailers contained in the Union List.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes, but supposing they want to enalrge the jurisdiction with regard, for instance, to the Concurrent List, List III, they cannot use article 114.
Now, Sir, I come to some of the observations which were made by my Friend, Mr. Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar. His observations related mostly to sub-clause (3). His first question was, what is the use of having sub