PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 15
would like to submit to my friend Mr. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar is that the law can never be hypothetical and a law can never be passed in anticipation of some jurisdiction being acquired. That is contrary to the principle of legislation. Law must be definite, law must be absolutely clear as to what it applies, to what it cannot apply. And therefore, unless and until we have with us a supplementary Instrument of Accession giving the Central Legislature the power to extend this legislation to the States, I am sure we could not anticipate that there might be an Instrument of Accession which the Governor-General might accept and then we might get a chance to extend this legislation. I am sure that is contrary to the principles of legislation. All that, therefore, we must hope for, for the moment, is to confine the Bill to the Provinces of British India, to hope that we will get similar Instruments of Accession—supplementary ones—from the Indian States, when we can by law either extend our legislation to the States or the States can pari passu along with this legislation have similar legislation in their own States and make the provisions of this law applicable to their territory. Sir, I therefore think that this amendment would make the Bill ultra vires and therefore could not be accepted.
Mr. Speaker : The point has been cleared. Does the Honourable Member press his amendment now ?
Shri M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar : I do not, Sir.
Mr. Speaker : Has the Honourable Member leave of the House to withdraw his amendment?
The amendment was, by leave of the Assembly, withdrawn.
Mr. Speaker : The question is:
“That clause 2 stand part of the Bill.”
The motion was adopted.
Clause 2 was added to the Bill.