DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 825
Mr. Speaker : I never said ‘ they never wanted to speak ’. I said they did not try to catch my eye. In between, Dr. Deshmukh got up and I called on him to speak.
Several Hon. Members : rose —
Mr. Speaker : I am not sure whether I should call Pandit Bhargava at this stage—for personal reasons. Mr. Jhunjunwala.
Shri Jhunjhunwala : Sir, I have given notice of two alternative amendments. One of my amendments reads thus:
“This Code applies to all citizens of India, that is Bharat, irrespective of their caste, creed, and irrespective of their belonging to or professing any religion”.
Alternatively, I have moved another amendment which reads thus :
“Provided, however, that notwithstanding anything contained in the above clauses, this Code shall not apply to any person unless such person got his name registered with such authority and in such manner as may be hereafter prescribed by Parliament, within one year after this Code comes into force, and in case of a minor within one year after such a minor attains majority.”
I want to assure the House that these amendments of mine are not dilatory ; nor am I opposed to all the provisions of this Code. The main object in moving my first amendment is that, as has been pointed out by my hon. Friend Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad, we have been passing many laws which are being declared ultra vires either by the High Courts or by the Supreme Court. It is therefore very necessary that before we take any such Bill, Act or legislation into consideration we should make sure that we are acting according to the Constitution. If we pass any law and ultimately that law is declared ultra vires, it will be a mere waste of the time of this House and also waste of so much money. It will serve no useful purpose. Under article 15 of the Constitution it is laid down that the State shall not discriminate against any citizen only on ground of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them. The amendment that I have moved makes this Code applicable to all citizens of India, that is, Bharat, whereas the clause as it stands is restricted only to a particular class of persons. If the law that we are passing is for the good it is good for all people. It is not right that we should discriminate one particular community against another. We should not discriminate one set of persons who are professing one religion from another set of persons who are professing another religion if our law is for their good. If it is not