PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 269
suitable notifications in order to be in conformity with the largest political international opinion in this country. This is all that we propose to do by way of changes in the old section
86 of the Civil Procedure Code.
Now, I come to section 87B in which I know most Members are deeply interested. Section 87 deals with the Rulers of the Former Indian States. The question is whether
12 N OON they should also be given any privileges, such as the one they had under the existing. Civil Procedure Code. Obviously, since they have ceased to be rulers in the political and legal sense of the term, they of course cannot claim any immunity from the operation of the law which is applicable to the rest of the citizens of this country. But the House will know that certain commitments have been made both by the Government of India and, if I may say so, also by the Constituent Assembly when the Constitution was before them, and it is necessary that we must recognise what we have already done. What is, therefore, proposed to be done by the new Section is to make section 85 and sub-sections ( 1 ) and ( 3 ) of Section 86 applicable to the Rulers of the former Indian States. If hon. members will refer to section 85 as put down in this amending Bill, they will find that it only says that when a foreign Ruler proposes to sue or if he is being sued, he may be permitted to appoint any particular individual, and the Government of India may permit him to do so, to conduct the litigation on his behalf either as a plaintiff or as a defendant. There is nothing wrong in extending this. The only privilege, so to say under section 85 that a ruler of a former Indian State gets is that he may not be required to attend personally when the suit is proceeding against him. He can defend by proxy.
With regard to 86( 1 ), it says that the consent of the Government of India may be necessary before any proceedings of a civil character are launched against a Ruler of a former Indian State. This matter, again, I believe, was considerably debated yesterday when we were dealing with the Bill to amend the Criminal Procedure Code. The point was that in the present circumstances, there are grounds to believe that those persons residing in the Indian States may have many grounds or reasons for giving effect to their grudge, to their