DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 331
“consideration” is. I submitted for your consideration that in the technical sense in which we use the word “considered” this Bill was never considered.
Shri Mohan Lal Gautam : I beg to state that this is a repitition of what he spoke in Hindustani.
Mr. Deputy Speaker : In so far as to enable me to understand the full implications.
Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : Without these preliminary remarks I could not make myself understood and those who know would have realized that I could not do more than this.
I was submitting with a view to convince you that as a matter of fact the real consideration, technically so called, was only given to the redrafted Bill. I said that I wanted to submit certain arguments : firstly, the report says that “we confined our deliberations to the redrafted Bill”. Secondly, Sir, the dissenting note of Bakshi Tek Chand as well as of Balkrishna Sharma says the same thing. I do not want to read further because the members have read it and it will be waste of time to read it again. When Mr. Balkrishna Sharma spoke the Honourable the Speaker was pleased to accept his statement. He again repeated in his speech that “we confined our attention to this redrafted Bill” : and when you see the report you will find that in the report itself there are some indications for instance in clause
99 that only the re-drafted Bill was considered in the technical sense.
Mr. Deputy Speaker : I am not able to follow what the honourable Member is driving at so far as this is concerned.
Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava : I am sorry I have not heard what has fallen from Mr. K. C. Sharma.
Honourable Members : Order, order.
Mr. Tajamul Hussain : Sit down !
Mr. Deputy Speaker : If you will permit me I will try to get along. There are two questions. If it is a question that we ought not to proceed with this Bill, then that point has been decided, The Bill has been taken into consideration. The Speaker has said that this Bill was before the Select Committee and with the other amendments that have been tabled. Therefore, so far as that matter is concerned, I may immediately say I am not in a position to go beyond the ruling of the Speaker. Apart from the question of a similar case in the Civil Procedure Code, a ruling has been given and it is not desirable to go over it in the same case. It may not be a precedent for some others.