PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 383
Dr. Ambedkar: I should like to repudiate any such suggestion as my hon. friend is making. We impute no bad motives to the Judges.
Prof. S. L. Saksena: I am glad that he has said it today. Apart from the reasons given by my friend, Prof. Shah, that we should not change the Constitution for the sake of four persons, still even on principle I think that a foreigner sitting in the place of the Chief Justice will not have the independence and courage to give a judgment which will be above suspicion. The Law Minister said that nobody has cast an aspersion on the Judges. I have carefully read the speech of the Prime Minister……
Mr. Chairman : May I just remind the hon. Member that the point at issue is not what the Law Minister or the Prime Minister has said in some other connection ? We are considering this clause and their view is not relevant to its consideration. The only point relevant is whether this clause should be accepted. I would beg of the hon. Member to confine his remarks to this question alone.
- Shri Rajagopalachari: The hon. Member wants to know what prohibition there was which we are trying to remove. Article 217 contains the prohibition against any Judge being a non-citizen. All the Judges would be covered by that provision. That is sought to be removed by a transitory provision.
Mr. Chairman: If a person cannot become a Judge of a High Court how can he become the Chief Justice ?
Shri Shiv Charan Lal: Transfer is covered by article 222. Therefore, for transfer it is not necessary that the Judge should be a citizen and it is not necessary to have this amendment.
Dr. Ambedkar : Sir, if it satisfies the House I would like to propose an amendment to clause 13 which would read thus :
In page 4, lines 8 and 9, “or of the Supreme Court”.
Shri Kamath: That is one of my two amendments that I have moved.
- P. D., Vol 12, Part II, 2nd June 1951, p. 10024.