Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Of reform and resistance

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Personal Loan

    Only the surviving witnesses to the era know how crucial a role the Hindu Code Bill, aimed at a comprehensive reform and codification of Hindu personal law, played in this country’s political evolution in the early years of Independence. The relentless, often bitter, fight over this hyper-controversial legislation also settled the delicate issue of Presidential powers under the Constitution.

     To drastically summarise the fascinating story, the Hindu Code Bill was a logical outcome of the struggle since the 19th century for reform of Hindu personal law and social customs that had already given the country laws against child marriages and for widow remarriage. There was rampant confusion about what exactly the Hindu law was. Verdicts on its various facets were scattered over countless and sometimes contradictory judgments of Britain’s Privy Council. However, by the time the voluminous Hindu Code Bill was ready in 1948, vociferous opposition to it had risen to a crescendo. For instance, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee who hadn’t said a word against the Hindu Code while he was a member of Jawaharlal Nehru’s cabinet (1947-50) thundered in 1951 that the Bill would “shatter the magnificent architecture of the Hindu culture”. By then he had founded the Jan Sangh, the forerunner of the BJP. Equally passionate in the Hindu Code’s defence were its supporters, with Nehru and his extremely able law minister, B. R. Ambedkar, in the forefront.

    Ads by Google

    The battle lines were clearly drawn, and neither side was prepared to give in. But primarily because the opposition to the Hindu Code within the Congress party was strong and widespread, its progress was glacially slow. In December 1949, when the Constituent Assembly, doubling as the Central Legislative Assembly, discussed it at length, 23 out of the 28 members who spoke were opposed to it. Most of them were Congressmen. Soon thereafter, India became a republic, and the Constituent Assembly yielded place to the provisional Parliament. The Bill lapsed but was immediately reintroduced in the new House. 

    ... contd.

    Next1234
    Of reform and resistanceBy: paritosh | 02-May-2009 Reply | Forward For ages, historians and columnists of Mr. Malhotra's clan have thrived in Delhi societies-network by eugolising Nehru. While the survivors are unable to continue their habit, some members of their descendant generation (the JNU brand, in parcular) choose to adopt that avocation. So, while I appreciate the lamenting of Atul, I find his expectation from these clumnists is removed from the ground realities!
    DetailsBy: Atul | 01-May-2009 Reply | Forward I have often found that when people write about history details are never provided. It is left to imagination / self motivated research of the reader to figure out why people were opposed to the Hindu Code bill and what the issues were. It paints historical characters in negative light (Rajendra Prasad, Mukherjee etc.) by painting them as status quoists and Nehru and Ambedkar as modernizers. That may be very well be true but readers should be allowed to make their own judgement rather than be lectured on this.
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.