I submit, Sir, that as regards 72-B there is no need for a new article at the present stage. If Professor Shah would take the trouble of referring to an article which will come up before us shortly, namely, article 83, he will find that it provides for disqualifications of Members-either for being, chosen as Members of Parliament, or for continuing as Members. The various disqualifications have been laid down in sub-clauses (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e). Sub-clause (e) is comprehensive in this sense, that a person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament if he is so disqualified by or under any law made by Parliament. It is true enough that sub-clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d) do not envisage the contingencies visualised by Professor Shah. But the new Parliament which will be elected under this Constitution will, I hope, Sir-in spite of the misgivings which you expressed yesterday as regards the dangers inherent in the adult franchise and the wider rights and privileges that are being conferred under the Constitution-be composed of persons imbued with wisdom and public spirit, and that in spite of all those handicaps and disadvantages we shall be able to elect persons to this Parliament who will discharge their duties to the electorate and the country with wisdom and sagacity. I am sure that this new Parliament under the new Constitution will frame such rules as will debar such Members from sitting or continuing in either House of Parliament as have been convicted of any of the offences which are mentioned by Prof. Shah in this new article 72-B. The case mentioned in the amendment is so obvious that nobody who is imbued with the right public spirit will say that a member convicted of treason, bribery or corruption or any other offence involving moral turpitude should be allowed to continue as a Member of either House of Parliament. It is derogatory not merely to the dignity of the Houses of Parliament but also derogatory to the good sense and wisdom of the people who elected them as members of Parliament. I therefore feel that the amendment of Prof. Shah 72-B is unnecessary at this stage and out of place here. As regards 72-C I think it is a mere matter of procedure which can be regulated later on when the procedure for the elections to Parliament and bye-elections comes up before Parliament. I therefore feel that both the amendments are out of place and need not be considered at this stage. I appeal to the House to reject both the amendments.
