DRAFT CONSTITUTION 857
*The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move :
“That in Form VI of the Forms of Declarations in the third Schedule, the words ‘or as may be specially permitted by the Governor in the case of any matter pertaining to the functions to be exercised by him in his discretion’ be omitted.”
These are unnecessary because we do not propose to leave any discretion in the Governor at all.
Shri H. V. Kamath : May I remind Dr. Ambedkar that 143 has not yet been amended ?
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Yes, I remember that.
Mr. President : We have abolished all discretion.
Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : The difficulty arises in connection with the
phraseology occurring at the end of Form VI.
Mr. President : That is why Dr. Ambedkar has moved for its deletion.
†The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : In proposing this amendment, I have not the slightest desire to offend the sentiments of some of the Members who have spoken against the draft on the ground that God has been placed below the line. Sir, in this matter I must admit that we have really no consistent policy which we have followed, for instance, in article 49, which has been passed. God has been, I think, placed above the line and affirmation below the line. In article 81, we have placed affirmation first and the oath afterwards. In this article, to which we have moved amendments, we have merely followed the wording of the prin cipal clause, which runs : “Affirm or Swear”. That being the language of the principal clause, the logical sequence was that the affirmation was placed above the line and the oath was placed below. It is a purely logical thing. Now, the reason why we have thought it desirable to place affirmation first and oath afterwards, was because in this country, at any rate, the Hindu, when he is called upon in any Court of Law to give evidence, generally begins by an affirmation. It is only Christians, Anglo-Indians and Muslims who swear. The Hindus do not like to utter the name of God. I therefore thought that in a matter of this sort, we ought to respect the sentiments and practice of the majority community, and consequently we have introduced this particular method by stating the position as to affirmation and oath. As I said, I have neither one view nor the other. I am perfectly prepared to carry out the wishes of the House. If the House is of the opinion that Mr. Kamath’s amendment should be accepted—and
*CAD, Vol. IX, 26th August 1949, pp. 711-712.
† Ibid., pp. 714-715.