Discussion on the Hindu Code after return of the Bill from the Select Committee (11th February 1949 to 14th December 1950) - Page 383

368 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES

sections of the people do not want ? I go further and say when you once admit that sacramental marriages are sacramental, then let religion be the test for providing the conditions for such a marriage. If religion allows childmarriage and marriages of minors, let it be allowed. It is a contradiction in terms first” to say that a marriage should be according to religion and then to add that it shall be according to religion and also according to what is provided in this Bill. That is contradiction in terms. Either allow sacramental marriages or do not allow sacramental marriages, if you do not like that. In that case, say that all marriages will be civil. If you say sacramental marriage is to be allowed, then the marriage has to be performed according to the sacraments. This is my humble contention and in so far as the provisions of section 7 of the Bill are concerned, they are not according to sacraments. There are certain other things added to sacrament. That should be strictly according to the religion, if religion is to be allowed. This is the second thing which I bring to your notice and this can be very easily done. This would satisfy and may to a great extent remove the causes of dis-satisfaction which at present exist. Dealing with principles only, my

simple suggestion is this, that in this very Act there should be provision which should allow society, and the joint family in co-parcenery form to

continue. Nothing would be lost thereby. In this country there are Muslims, there are Christians, there are Parsis—Parsis are a very small community—

and still if they are allowed to have their own law of succession etc. what would be lost if a certain larger section is allowed to have co-parcenery,

if they so chose. If this principle is once accepted then changes can be made in the whole draft according to that principle.

My further submission is that the Bill may be re-circulated for opinion. Here I do not touch on the ruling which has been already given by the Chair. The question that then arose was whether for purposes of the rules publication was sufficient and the ruling was that it was sufficient. That does not however preclude me from raising the point whether it is desirable that the Bill should be re-circulated. My submission is that it has been lost sight of that the Bill if passed would be automatically applicable to States whatever Dr. Ambedkar may say to the contrary. My humble opinion is that it would apply to all those territories of states which have merged in the provinces and all those areas which have agreed that the Centre would have the power to legislate for them.