458 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
is all that I can do, and I shall to the best of my ability, avoid all irrelevant matters being brought in Subject to this. I would like to give as much freedom as possible.
*Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad (West Bengal: Muslim) : Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is a strange irony of fate that apart from the interrupted nature of the debates on this Bill, it has been decided by Government that the chequered career, of this Bill and the intermittent debate should, after an interval be seriously resumed on the All-Fools’ Day. On the last occasion, when I pointed out that the Bill was sent to the Select Committee in a great hurry on the
9th of April last, some honourable member reminded us that 9th April was very near the 1st of April. Somehow or other this Bill is associated with the 1st of April. On this day, we are accustomed from time immemorial to deal with each other in a playful spirit. We issue bogus invitations, bogus marriages are announced and various other bogus things are done.
Shrimati Ammu Swaminadhan (Madras : General) : Sir, has this got anything to do with the Hindu Code ? Just now you said that no irrelevant matter will be allowed. Has all-fools’ day anything to do with the Hindu Code
Mr. Deputy Speaker : I have not heard the honourable Member sufficiently to come to a conclusion as to whether it is irrelevant or not.
Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Sir, I was merely emphasizing the unsatisfactory manner in which the Bill is being brought up from time to time. A Bill of this importance and magnitude requires that it should be sat over continuously by honourable Members.
Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra : Spat over ?
Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Sat over. Pandit Maitra thought “spat over”. I did not mean that. I submit, Sir, a Bill of this magnitude requires that Members should sit over it continuously for a long time. The disadvantage of considering this matter at long intervals is that Members lose the thread of argument and it is very difficult for them to appreciate what has already been said so as to connect with what is said on each occasion. I submit, therefore, that this is not dealing seriously with the Bill or with the House.
On the last occasion when I was dealing with the history of this important legislation, I pointed out that the first mistake was committed in 1937 with the passage of the Hindu Married Women ‘s Rights to Property Act, 1937.
*C.A. (Leg.) D., Vol. IE, Part II, 1st April 1949. pp. 2213-43.