• Capt. Praveen Davar

As the mere mention of November 14 reminds one of Jawaharlal Nehru, the Architect of Modern India, April 14 instantly brings to mind Dr. BR Ambedkar, Architect of India’s Constitution whose 132nd birth anniversary is being celebrated this month. This was not so, say, two decades ago. But with time, Ambedkar’s birth date has become as well-known as Pt. Nehru’s as also of Mahatma Gandhi. By a strange coincidence, the revolutionary changes in the Hindu law regarding marriage, divorce and inheritance were primarily the work of the two great men whose birthday falls on the same calendar day of a month. Baba Sahib Ambedkar was inducted in the Nehru cabinet in August 1947 even though he was in the Opposition (there were some others too like Shyama Prasad Mookerjee, Baldev Singh and John Mathai).

The Hindu Code Bill had its origin in a legislation which took effect in the year 1937 that is the Women’s Rights to Property Act. The government of India set up a Committee under the Chairmanship of Sir B.N. Rau, later the chief draftsman of the Constitution under Dr. Ambedkar, which gathered various views and submitted a draft Hindu Code in 1944. But the political circumstances-Independence and Partition-did not allow for discussion of the text. In 1948, Pt. Nehru entrusted the drafting of the new code to Dr. Ambedkar. It was felt by the Cabinet, especially Nehru and Ambedkar, that codifying the Hindu law would to a great extent check the injustices suffered by Hindu women. The life mission of both the first Prime Minister and the first Law Minister was to bring equality in Indian society and to end all discrimination based on grounds of caste, race, religion and gender. But no sooner was the Bill introduced that there was vehement opposition from orthodox Hindu elements in the country. Even Dr. Rajendra Prasad, the President of India, was opposed to the idea and desired its postponement, but the PM declined to do so politely telling the President ‘It is difficult for me to override the cabinet decision in this matter.’

Even though the Cabinet decided to introduce the Hindu Code Bill on February 1951, it was postponed to the next session of Parliament to be taken up in the first week of September. Ambedkar wrote to PM Nehru that ‘in view if his ill health which required immediate long-term treatment, the Bill should be taken up in mid-August and completed by September.’ But there were more urgent bills to be taken up and it was not possible to advance the date for the introduction of the Hindu Code Bill.

Meanwhile, more opposition built up against the Bill. ‘Jan Sangh’ leader Shyama Prasad Mookerjee issued a public statement against the Bill: ‘The magnificent structure of Hindu culture will stultify a dynamic and catholic way of life that had wonderfully adapted itself to changes for centuries.’ The reservation of the orthodox in Parliament was supplemented in the streets by the cadres of the RSS. They shouted slogan against Pt. Nehru and Dr. Ambedkar: ‘Down with the Hindu Code Bill’ and ‘May Pandit Nehru perish.’ One saffron clad swami even went to the extent of saying that ‘an “untouchable” had no business meddling in matters normally the preserve of Brahmins.’ Within Parliament, many conservative members claimed that the Hindu laws had stayed unchanged since the Vedic period. One member, Ramnarayan Singh stated: ‘Despite the challenges posed by Buddhism, Islam and Christianity, the Vedic religion did not perish... we have now Pandit Nehru’s administration whose representative Dr. Ambedkar wants to abrogate with a single stroke all those rules which have existed since the beginning of the world.’

The strong opposition to the Bill both in Parliament and outside, delayed its passage. On August 30, 1951, Nehru wrote to Ambedkar: ‘Progress in Parliament has been very slow and we have got rather stuck up. There are quite a number of important Bills which we must pass. I had hoped, as you know, to take up the Hindu Code Bill on September 05 but, I fear, this will be difficult for a variety of reasons. One of these is that we have not got enough time before that to consider it fully in the Party, which is important to save time.’

On September 15, 1951, President Rajendra Prasad sent a note to PM Nehru expressing a desire to act solely on his own judgment, independently of the Council of Ministers. He maintained that the Provisional Parliament did not have the authority to enact such major legislation as the Hindu Code Bill because it was indirectly elected and its members lacked the ‘public mandate’ of a general election. He desired to use the power of his office either to force the Provisional Parliament to shelve the measure or, failing that, to veto it even against the advice of his Cabinet. To make matters besides the President, the speaker of the Lok Sabha and many senior Ministers were also opposed to the ‘Controversial’ Bill.

Pt. Nehru wrote to Dr. Rajendra Prasad the same day: ‘It is true that when any social or economic changes are proposed in an existing structure of society, there are always some elements which are strongly in favour of them and some opposed to them very strongly. No reform can take place if this opposition is considered to be an adequate bar to change. The mere fact of long-established static conditions can hardly be considered an argument for no change, even though facts otherwise warrant it...’

But due to stiff opposition both within and without Parliament, the Bill could not be moved despite the best efforts of Nehru. In view of the heavy business before the House and the short time at its disposal before the session ended, it was decided to concentrate on passing as a separate measure Part II of the Bill, viz.., that dealing with marriage and divorce. Yet even the Part II of Bill could not be passed and was dropped on September 22, 1951. With utter disappointment Dr. Ambedkar remarked, ‘It was killed and buried, unwept and unsung after four clauses were passed.’ Finally, he resigned from the Nehru cabinet on the September 27, 1951. Besides blaming the Government, Ambedkarheld that the lack of moral courage and strength of character of women in India had come in the way of the Bill. None of the prominent women leaders stood behind him to pass the legislation. This deeply hurt him as he was only trying to promote gender justice in India.

Nehru wrote to Ambedkar on September 27, 1951: ‘I can quite understand your great disappointment at the fact the Hindu Code Bill could not be passed in this session and that even the marriage and divorce part of it had ultimately to be postponed. I know very well how hard you have laboured at it and how keenly you have felt about it... I have been long convinced of its necessity and I was anxious that it should be passed. I tried my utmost, but the rules and regulation of Parliament were against us... Personally, I shall not give up this fight because I think it is intimately connected with any progress on any front that we desire to make.’

But besides the non-passage of the Hindu Code Bill, there were other reasons why Ambedkar resigned from the cabinet. Firstly, his differences with Pt. Nehru on Kashmir policy and foreign policy in general. Secondly, he was deeply distressed with the treatment accorded to scheduled castes and other backward castes who were suffering from the ‘same old injustice, the same old oppression, and the same old discrimination which existed before.’Thirdly, he wanted the stewardship of the Planning Commission in the place of Law Ministry which did not materialize. Dr. Ambedkar’s resignation from the Ministry was soon followed by a decision of far-reaching consequences: his decision to renounce Hinduism, and embrace Buddhism.

However, the Hindu Code Bill was later split into four Bills, and the same were put on the Statute Book by Parliament after the elections to the first Lok Sabha in 1952. By this time Dr. Rajendra Prasad, overwhelmed by the popularity of Pt. Nehru in the country as shown by the result of the first Lok Sabha (Congress won 364 out of 489 seats) didn’t raise any objection. But Dr. Shyama Prasad Mookerjee and his Bhartiya Jana Sangh Party remained opposed to the Bills as they were in 1951. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; the Hindu succession Act, 1956; the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 and the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, were the four enactments which incorporated the ideas and principles of the original Hindu Code Bill.

According to Dr. Ambedkar, ‘The Bill was greatest social reform measure ever undertaken by the Legislature in this country. No law passed by the India Legislature in the past, or likely to be passed in the future, can be compared to it in point of its significance. To leave inequality between class and class, between sex and sex, which is the soul of Hindu society, untouched and to go on passing legislation relating to economic problems is to make a farce of our Constitution and to build a palace on dung heap. This is the significance attached to the Hindu Code.’

Despite the fact that Ambedkar had resigned from his Cabinet in October 1951, in extreme bitterness, Prime Minister Nehru paid a generous tribute to him after the Dalit icon died in December 1956: ‘Dr. Ambedkar would be remembered, above all, as a symbol of revolt against all the oppressive features of Hindu society. He will be remembered also for the great trouble he took over the question of Hindu law reform. I am happy that he saw that reform in a very large measure carried out, perhaps not in the form of that monumental to me that he had himself drafted, but in separate bits.’ Thus, the credit for the Hindu code bill, the greatest step for women empowerment, before the Rajiv Gandhi government initiated the Panchayati Raj Bill, giving 33% reservation for women, belongs to both Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru and Baba Saheb Ambedkar.

(The writer is former Secretary, AICC)