712 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Hindu Law of succession. In areas governed by Mitakshara school, when there was a joint Hindu family after the death of one co-sharer, if he
left no son the widow was not entitled to any share. She was dependent upon the brothers-in-law or the husband’s father and the other coparcener, dependent entirely upon their mercy for their maintenance. She was to
receive only food and clothing and nothing else; mere maintenance only. Under that law it was enacted that childless widows would be entitled to the same share of the property as her husband would be entitled to
and if she so liked, she could even ask for the property to be partitioned. It was held at the time that Hindu women in a joint family being entitled to sue for partition was considered to be repugnant to the fundamental
principles of the Hindu Law, but the Legislature again made this change, a change which was warranted by the changing times, by the rising consciousness not only among women but among the men in this country,
among Hindus who wanted that this should be done to their sisters and mothers. Now, at that time also there was a great deal of stir in the country but ultimately that stir also died down. Twelve years have passed
and we cannot say that Hindu society in any way has crumbled to pieces or that Hindu religion has been attacked in a very vital matter so that it is now going to pieces.
I come now to more recent times. In 1946, shortly before the present Assembly came into existence, a Bill permitted marriages among sagotras was passed by this Legislature. That Bill did not interfere with the prohibited degrees. Even though persons were living in different parts of the country and did not belong to the same caste, yet because they belonged to the same Gotra according to some technical meaning of the texts, the marriages could be invalidated, Such marriages, even though performed in several parts of the country, their validity was in doubt. That was again an enabling measure which was passed in 1946 and to which no serious objection has been taken.
Now, I would ask Hon. Members to bear in mind what we did in the last April session of this Assembly. My esteemed friend, Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava brought a very simple Bill consisting of one section only, but a Bill which was of a most far-reaching and important character. By that Bill it was enacted that notwithstanding any text of Hindu law or any custom or usage having the force of law to the contrary, a marriage between various castes of Hindus would be deemed to have been validly made. That was a very great step, a