The correct option is 2 only.
Explanation
The question pertains to the Language Controversy within the Constituent Assembly of India. The debate over the official language was one of the most contentious issues during the framing of the Constitution, with strong arguments presented by proponents of Hindi (Hindustani) and those representing non-Hindi speaking regions.
Statement 1 is Incorrect:
R.V. Dhulekar, a member from the United Provinces, held the exact opposite view. On 10 December 1946, he declared that "People who are present in this House to fashion a constitution for India and do not know Hindustani are not worthy to be members of this Assembly. They had better leave." He argued that knowledge of Hindustani was essential for membership, not optional.
Statement 2 is Correct:
Dhulekar was a staunch and aggressive advocate for Hindi (or Hindustani) to be used as the language of constitution-making. He frequently spoke in Hindi in the Assembly and insisted that the Constitution be framed in the national language, often leading to heated exchanges with the Chair and other members who requested English translations.
Statement 3 is Incorrect:
Dhulekar did not view the promotion of Hindi as an artificial imposition. On the contrary, he believed that Hindi/Hindustani was the natural language of the nation and the freedom struggle. He viewed the continued use of English as an imposition and a relic of colonial rule, arguing passionately for its replacement with an Indian language.
Key Takeaway:
R.V. Dhulekar is historically noted for his aggressive stance in the Constituent Assembly, where he demanded that Hindustani be the sole language of the Constitution and asserted that those unable to speak it were unfit to be members of the Assembly.