PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 695
Dr. Ambedkar: I beg to move :
To sub-clause (1) of clause 124, add the following:
“ Explanation. —Any such expenses as aforesaid incurred or authorised by any institution or organisation for the furtherance of the prospects of the election of a candidate supported by such institution or organisation shall not be deemed to be expenses incurred or authorised within the meaning of this clause.”
Mr. Speaker: Amendment moved.
Shri Kamath: I beg to move:
In part (2) of clause 124, omit the words “of any building”.
I raised this point to the Select Comittee, but it was not considered at any length and not much attention was paid to it. I would state my difficulty precisely and briefly. I know of some buildings in Madhya Pradesh where the lower floor is converted into a wine or liquor shop and the upper floor has been leased out to certain persons or to students or to other people for different purposes. Can a meeting be held on the top floor of the building ?
Dr. Ambedkar: There is no such fear at all.
Shri Kamath: But it is open to doubt and I would like the Hon. Minister to omit the words “of any building” and thus avoid difficulties which it may be difficult to solve. The wording may be reconsidered so that the matter may be placed beyond the shadow of a doubt.
Mr. Speaker: Amendment moved :
In part (2) of clause 124, omit the words “of any building”.
Pandit Kunzru wanted to sav something ?
Pandit Kunzru: I was going to submit that the amendment proposed by Dr. Ambedkar is a very serious character and we ought to be given, in fairness time to consider it fully and to propose amendments to it. A mere perusal of the amendment shows that it will have a vital effect on many provisions of the Bill, and will seriously alter the balance between candidates of different parties. I suggest, therefore that we should be given time to consider this amendment. This is the only clause after all, that has not been passed and nothing will be lost and everything will be gained. I think,