Subject NOT available

click here for IIIF manifest

REGISTERED No. D. 221

The Gazette of India

EXTRAORDINARY

PART II—Section 2

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

No. 66] NEW DELHI, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1968/PAUSA 22, 1890

Separate paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as

a separate compilation.

LOK SABHA

The following Bills were introduced in Lok Sabha on the 13th December, 1968: —

BILL NO. 106 or 1968

A Bill further to amend the Constitution of India.

BE it enacted by Parliament in the Nineteenth Year of the Republic of India as follows: —

1. (1) This Act may be called the Constitution (Amendment) Act, 1968.

(2) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Govern-

Short

Title

and com.

mence-

ment.

ment may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint.

1639

2. In article 80 of the Constitution,—

(a) for clause (1), the following clause shall be substituted, Amend- ment of articlt 80.

namely: —

"(1) The Council of States shall consist of not more than two huntired and thirty-eight representatives of the Statet and of the Union territories";

(b) clause {?) shall be omitted.

3. In article 171 of the Constitution—

(a) in clause (^) —

ment

of arti-

clt 171.

(i) in part (d), for the words "as nearly as may be, one- third" the words "the remainder" shall be substituted;

(U) part (e), shall be omitted.

(b) clause (5) shall be omitted-

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

Article 80 of the Constitution authorises the President to nominate to Rajya Sabha twelve members from among persons who have special knowledge in matters like literature, science, art and social service. A similar power is vested in the Governor of a State under article 171 with respect to States having Legislative Councils, but the number of members to be nominated depends upon the size of the Legislative Council. The ostensible object of these provisions is to secure the distinguished persons a place in the Upper Houses so that their experience is available in the deliberations of those bodies. Experience of the working of these provisions has, however, shown that this power, instead of being used for the purpose for which it is intended, has been, and is in an increasing manner likely to be, used in the furtherance of party or of political ends. More- over, the functioning of the Upper Houses for the last fifteen years antl more has shown that this power to nominate members which militates against the basic system of representative democracy enshrined in our Constitution, is no longer necessary. Incidentally, it is significant that under article 171 (2), Parliament may, by law, completely alter the composition of the Legislative Councils, a fact which would show that the power to nominate members, among other matters, was not intended to be of a permanent character.

The Bill seeks to amend the relevant provisions of the Constitu- tion so as to do way with the power of nomination to Legislatures antl includes the necessary consequential changes.

NEW DELHI; C. C. DESAI.

The 29th October, 1968.

BILL NO. 114 or 1968

A Bill further to amend the Hindu Succession Act, 1958

BE it enacted by Parliament in the Nineteenth Year of the

Republic of India as follows: —

1. (1) This Act may be called the Hindu Succession (Amendment)

Act, 1968.

Short title and com- mencement,

(2) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Govern-

ment may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint.

2. After section 24 of the Hindu Succession Act of 1&56 the fol-

lowing new section shall be inserted, namely: —

Insertion of new section 24k.

Re-marriage and conver- sion to lisqualif^ widows "24A. Where, before or after the commencement of this Act, a Hindu widow remarries or has ceased or ceases to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion, she shall tiiveat har- self of the estate inherited from her husband and it shall pass to the next heirs of her deceased husband as if she had then died."

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

Under the Hindu Succession Act, 19&6, a widow of a male Hindu dying intestate inherits simultaneously with sons, daughters and other heirs specified in class I of the schedule thereof and she takes her share absolutely. Remarriage or conversion of a Hindu widow to any other religion are not considered, under the Act, as grounds for divesting her of the property inherited from her husband. Al- though Hindu Widows Re-marriage Act, 1856 has not been repealed, section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, in effect, abrogates the operation of that Act in the case of a Hindu widow who succeeds to the property of her husband. Further, section 26 of the Hindu Suc- cession Act, 1956, deals with certain disqualifications ensuing upon change of religion, but does not affect the rights of a widow who has succeeded to her husband. Share in the property of the hus- band was given to the widow in order to make a definite provision for her to lead an honourable life as a widow. If she remarries or changes her religion, then the very purpose for which the provision was made stands frustrated anti as such it is desirable that she should be divested of the property which she inherited from her husband and the same should be inherited by heirs of the husband.

Hence the Bill.

NKW DILHI; OM PRAKASH TYAOL

The \2th November, 1968.

BILL NO. 112 OF 1902

A Bill further to amend the Constitution of India,

BE it enacted by Parliament in the Nineteenth Year of the

Republic of India as follows:—

1. This Act may be called the Constitution (Amendment) Act,

i9"a

Short

tittt.

2. In the heading of Part IV of the Constitution, the word "Direc-

tive" shall be omitted.

Amend- ment of heading of Part IV.

Amend-

ment of

Article 87.

3. In article 37 of the Constitution, for the words "shall not be enforceable by any court, but the principles therein laid down are nevertheless", the word "are" shall be substituted,

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

Part IV of the Constitution is a very important part of our Consti- tution. But giving it the name of "Directive" and barring its en- forcement by any Court of Law has put a premium on its defiance uy the Government. Rather legislation even contradictory to tlv- provisions of this Part and even going in the opposite direi_l, on can- not be questioned in any Court of Law. This has made our Constitu- tion a laughing stock. It is high time that after the lapse of twenty- one years of Independence and in the nineteenth year of our Republic we remove the bar from the Courts of Law with rcgaiti to the en- forcement of the provisions of this Part

Hence the Bill.

NEW DELHI; BHOGENDRA JHA The lZth November, 1968.

BILL NO. 110 or 1968

A Bill jurther to amend the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

BE it enacted by Parliament in the Nineteenth Year of the

Republic of India as follows: —

1. This Act may be called the Hindu Succession (Amendment)

Act, 1968.

Short title.

2. In section 10 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1958 (hereinafter 5 30 of 19S6 referred to as the principal Act),—

Amend- ment of •action 10

(i) in Rule 2, the words "and daughters" shall be omitted;

(ii) in Rule 3, the words "or each pre-deceased daughter" shall be omitted; and

(Hi) in Rule 4,—

(a) in part (i), the words "and daughters" shall be omitted;

(b) part (ii) shall be omitted.

3. In section 15 of the principal Act,—

(1) for clause (a) of sub-seclion (1), the following clause

Amend- ment of section IB shall be substituted, namely: —

"(a) firstly, upon the sons (including the children of any pre-deceased son) and the husband;"; and

(2) in sub-section (2),—

(i) clause (a) shall be omitted;

(ii) in clause (b), for the words and brackets "in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter)", the words "in the absence of any son of the deceased (including the children of any pre-deceaseti son)" shall be substituted.

4. In section 16 of the principal Act, for Rule 2, the following ltule shall be substituted, namely: —

Amend- ment of section 16.

''Rule 2.—If any son of the intestate had pre-deceased the intestate leaving his own children alive at the time of the intestate's death, the children of such son shall take between them the share which such son would have taken if living at the intestate's death,"

5. In section 17, for sub-clause (a) of clause (ii), the following sub-clause shall be substituted, namely: —

Amend- ment of sr ction 17.

" (a) firstly, upon the sons (including the children of any pre-deceased son) and the mother;".

6. In Section 20 of the principal Act,—

(i) for the word "child", the word "son" shall be substituted;

Amend- ment of section 20, and

(ii) the words "or she" shall be omitted.

7. In the Schedule to the principal Act,—

(1) for the heirs in class I, the following heirs in Class I Amend- ment of Schedule.

shall bu substituted, namely: —

"son; widow; mother; son of a pre-deceased son; widow oi a pre-deceased son; son of a pre-deceased sou of a pre- deceased son; widow of a pre-deceased son of a pre-deceaseti son.".

(2) in heirs in Class II,—

( 1 m entiy II, the words, brackets and figures "(1) Son's daughter's son, (2) son's daughter's daughter" shall be omitted;

(ii) entry III shall be omitted; and

(Hi) in entry IV, the words, brackets and figure "(4) sister's daughter" shall be omitted.

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

Under the existing provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, a daughter inherits both from her parental side as also through her husband. Inheritance by the daughter of the parental property not only leads to family feuds and fragmentation of family holdings but also leaves the .sons at. a disadvantage. The purpose of the present Bill is to do away with this anomaly.

NEW DELHI; CHAUDHURI RANDHIR SINGH.

The 13th November, 1968.

BILL NO. 115 OF 1968

A Bill further to amend the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952.

BE It enacted by Parliament In the Nineteenth Year of the

Republic of India as follows: —

1. (1) This Act may be called the Contempt of Courts (Amend-

ment) Act, 1968.

(2) It extends to the whole of Intiia.

(3) It shall come Into force at once.

Short title, ex- tent and com- mence- ment.

2. In the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952, in section 4,—

XXXII of i9sa.

Amend- ment of section 4.

(i) the first proviso shall be re-numbered as second proviso and before the second proviso, as so re-numbered, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely: —

"Provided that the accused may be discharged if he chooses to tender an apology on entering appearance to the satisfaction of the court."

(ii) in the second proviso, as so re-numbered, for the word "Provided", the words "Provided further" shall be substituted.

(in) the following explanation shall be added at the end, namely: —

'Explanation,—For purposes of this Act, the term "con- tempt of court" shall mean—

(a) misrepresentation of proceedings of court; or

(b) prejudicing the public for or against either party; or

(c) attempting to influence the court's judgment, in- sulting or scandalizing the presiding officer or attribut- ing unworthy motives in any writing, except allegations made in transfer applications, or disregard of prescribed rules of good behaviour in courts.'

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

The present law of contempt of courts is embodied in the Con- tempt ol! Com ts Act, J9f>2 (Act XXXII of 1952). But this Act does noL contain auv definition o{ the term "contempt of court". Courts are guided largely by the previous pronouncements of judges made by thorn as and when cases came up before them. A clear definition oi th;¹ term "contempt of court" is necessary, particularly in view of the fact that the guarantee afforded by article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution to "iiftdom of tipeech and expression" specifically ex- cludes from its pioiection anything said or done in relation to con- tempt of court.

It has also been observed from proceedings of courts that the first proviso of section 4 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952, pro- viding for the discharge of accused on tendering apology has not been properly understood and courts have been demanding that the accused should offer apology before hearing of the case proceeded, that is to say as soon as 1he accused entered appearance in obedience to the show cause notice. This procedure is not warranted by the wording of the first proviso. However, as the courts have been proceeding in thai direction, it is necessary that the position should be cleared that this proviso is intended only to enable the judge to know before pro- ceeding with the hearing whether the accused would offer an apology and thus save the time of the court or whether the accused would like to proceed with the hearing.

Hence the Bill.

NEW DELHI; TENNETT VISWANATHAM.

The 13th November, 1968.

S. L. SHAKDHER,

Secretary.

PRTNTTO IW INDIA BY THE UENFTW, MANAGER, GOVERNMENT Of INDIA PRESS. MIMTO RO^D, MEW DELHI AND 1-UBLIKMID BY TH1 MAlfAGHR OF PUBLICATIONS, DBLHI, 1&C0