DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 621
introduced into this Bill and that point of view has not been taken into consideration at all. It might be pointed out that the original Bill as drafted in 1947 excluded the Marumakkattayam and the Alia Santhanam law from the operation of all the important branches of law covered by it. I will point out why this Bill is not sufficiently progressive and why it should be made more progressive.
Marriage under Marumakkattayam law is a purely mundane affair. There is no religion in it. There is no sapindaship or sacrament in it. This Hindu Code Bill recognises only two kinds of marriage— sacramental marriage and civil marriage. Civil marriage is common and we have no objection to it. We are prepared to abide by provisions relating to it.
That the authors of the Code were under a misapprehension that even the Marumakkattayam marriages were sacramental marriages is clear from a reading of clause 51 of the Bill where they say that even the Malbar marriages are sacramental. That is the basis on which they have framed that clause. In Malbar marriage has nothing to do with religion. Clause 51 says:
“Nothing contained in this Part shall be deemed to affect any right conferred by the Madras Marumakkattayam Act, 1932 (Madras Act XXII of 1932) to obtain the dissolution of a sacramental marriage, whether solemnized before or after the commencement of this Code.”
There is another direction in which we would like to get an amendment of this Bill in so far as we are concerned. Our law allows us to marry our father’s niece or our maternal uncle’s daughter. In fact many of us consider it a privilege to marry our uncle’s daughter or our father’s niece. But this is interdicted by the provisions relating to sapindaship and prohibited relationship. This encroachment on our right is not likely to be viewed with favour by the people of my part of the country.
In regard to judicial separation or restitution of conjugal rights, there are no provisions at all in our law. Either a marriage exists or it is got rid of by means of a divorce. There is no middle course. The provision for divorce is very simple. Either of the aggrieved parties goes to the nearest court of civil jurisdiction and puts in a petition with twelve annas stamp on it praying that “for such and such reasons we are not able to pull on together and therefore a divorce may be granted”. For a period of six months that petition is kept pending. Perhaps the authors of the law wished to see whether a reconciliation was possible within this period of six months. After this period of