794 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Mr. Speaker : Will the hon. member resume his seat ? Order, order. I want the hon. Member not to interrupt.
Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : In order to ensure against a particular kind of hell, the man should have a son, and in order to have that, he must marry. That is one of the ten samskaras of a Hindu. It is a religious practice, and in order, to have son, a man can have one wife or more than one. Therefore. I submit that this provision curtails the Fundamental Right given in article 25(1). I am not raising a point which is only of academic interest, for this clause has been utilized by the Bombay High Court recently in declaring a certain Act—Prevention of Bigamous Marriages Act—to be ultra vires.
Dr. Ambedkar : By the Bombay High Court ? I am sure that is not correct. It was probably some magistrate.
Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : The question before us is whether some of the provisions relating to marriage may not be ultra vires of the Constitution. There is also the ground of discrimination, in view of article
15(1) of the Constitution. There are numerous other articles detailing with minor aspects of the question, but I think, these two would suffice for the time being. I am well aware of the principle that the Speaker cannot rule out a point because the legality of it is doubtful. But these are real stumbling blocks and I would request you, Sir, to consider the legality of the Bills. As we all know, a large number of Acts and sections have been declared ultra vires. Even at the time the Constitution was passed, objections were raised that these might be declared ultra vires . We have enacted these Fundamental Rights and anything inconsistent with them; to the extent of that inconsistency, would be null and void. There is no way out of it. If there is any law, any Act, which is in any way inconsistent with these articles, those laws or Acts, to the extent of that inconsistency, shall be void. That is the serious question before us now. Should we pass an enactment which would be declared null and void ? Should we not reconsider the Bill in view of the structure of the Constitution which we have chosen to give to ourselves ?
Sir, these are some of the matters which I venture to submit for your consideration.
Mr. Speaker: I do not think I need go in detail over the serious points raised by the hon. Member, Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad. The short answer which I can give to whatever he has stated is this. What he urges now may be true in respect of some of the provisions at the most, not all the provisions. And the proper procedure and time to