930 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
State, and there can by no difference of opinion; but the only question is whether in the list as framed by the Drafting Committee that matter is not already covered. In framing these entries, what we have done in to mention and categorize subjects of legislation and not the objects of purposes of legislation.
Protection of children is a purpose which a legislature is entitled to achieve if in certain circumstances it thinks that it must do so. The question is whether under any of these entries, it would not be possible for the State to achieve that purpose, namely, the protection of children.
It seems to me that any one of these entries which are included in List II could be employed by the State for the purpose of framing laws to protect children. For instance, under entry 2 of List II, administration of justice, it would be open for the State to establish juvenile courts for children.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : That is not what I meant. I never referred to juvenile Courts.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : For instance, take prisons and reformatory and Borstal institutions, they may be empowered to establish special kinds of prisons where there would be, not the principle of punishment, but the principle of reformation. Take the case of education.
Shrimati G. Durgabai : May I submit, Sir, the case of delinquent children stands absolutely on different footing and from destitute and abandoned children?
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : As I was saying entry 18, which deals with education in List II, could be used by the State for the purpose of establishing special kinds of schools for children including even abandoned children. Under entry 42, dealing with the incorporation of societies and so on, it would be open to the State to register societies for the purpose of looking after children or they may themselves start some kind of corporation to do this.
Therefore, if my friends contend that the statement, which I am making in all sincerity, that there is every kind of provision which the State may make for the purpose of protecting children under the entries which are included in List II, I think there is no purpose, in having a separate entry dealing with the protection of children. As I stated, protection of children cannot be a subject of legislation; it can be the object, purpose of legislation.
Dr. P. S. Deshmukh : You have made provision for the protection of wild birds, even!
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I can quite see both of my Friends are very persistent in this matter. I would therefore request them