842 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
opinions which have been circulated to us are there, any hon. Member can see them. There you will find that the Bengal Government opposes the Bill.
Pandit Malaviya (Uttar Pradesh) : Why should they see if it is not convenient to them ?
Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : They find that the law is not convenient to Bengal soil. What is more, all the judges of the Calcutta High Court— I suppose they should be regarded as educated people, not orthodox, not the rabble, they are fine, cultured, intelligent men. They are not mere orthodox men—gave their opinion jointly that they are opposed to the Bill.
Shri Raj Bahadur : May I know, Sir, whether it is permissible for the member to attack the very foundation and principle of the Bill now ? Is he speaking on clause 2 or on the whole Bill ?
Sardar Hukam Singh : It was an answer to the interruption on his statement that Hindus did not want it.
Mr. Chairman : Order, order. So far the observations of the hon. Member were relevant under amendment No. 31. But at the same time I would request him not to be very general in his remarks. He ought to confine his observations to the particular points made out by him in his amendment.
Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : The point before us is whether the law should be made applicable to persons who do not agree to be bound by it. If you do not give the option you will be forcing the law upon people who do not want it. That is why I thought that in order to strengthen that point the objection of eminent authorities like High Court Judges and the Government of Bengal was relevant. It shows that the people are against it—not the backward people but intelligent, civilised people who have some status in society. That was my purpose in referring to it.
I, therefore, submit that in view of all these objections, the law should be made applicable to those who are particularly enamoured of it, who think they will be benefited by it, but it should not be made applicable to one and all to those who do not want it. I submit that those who are opposed to the Hindu Code Bill are a minority in the House, but those who are in favour of the Bill are a microscopic minority in the country. The whole question is : is it enough for you to be fired with the idea that the Hindu Code is a good thing if the people do not want it ? In a democratic society you must not force