The Alipore Bomb Trial

Fifteenth Day's Proceedings

On Tuesday, when the Court rose, Mr. Das was dealing with the cases of those appellants who had not made any confession in the lower Court. Counsel First took up the case of Poresh Chunder Moulik and dealt with the exhibits against him and the evidence of watch witnesses.

It had been said that Barin in his confession referred to Paresh as one of the men in the garden. Counsel said that Barin was asked who were the men in the garden at the time he was arrested and he named Paresh as one of the men who were being then instructed on religious and political subjects. Mr. Das said that this certainly did not go against Paresh. Mr. Das also read portions from the confession of Ullaskar which referred to Paresh. According to Ullaskar, Paresh was not an active member.

     Mr. Das then went on to deal with the case of Sishir Kumar Ghose. In this connection their Lordships would remember that one of the Assessors with his opinion gave his reasons while

Page 253

the other did not. Counsel then dealt with the exhibits in his case.

     The Chief Justice: What do you say is the net result of the documents ?

     Mr. Das: I submit that these documents merely shows that, at some time or other Sishir went to the garden from the fact of the Ending of these documents. None of these documents were incriminating in the sense that they contained nothing to show that he was a conspirator. As to whether your Lordships in this case infer requisite objects that depends on the length of his stay at the garden but of that there is no evidence. Unless your Lordships can fix the length of his stay in the garden no such inference arises.

     Continuing Mr. Das said that in this case there were no overt acts from which one can gather intention. He then referred to the watch witnesses and said that the evidence given by them was not credible, because some of them saw Sishir in Calcutta, at a time when it was admitted he was in Bombay. Counsel then drew their Lordships‘ attention to the fact that in the course of the trial a judgment was admitted. Sishir was once bound down to keep the peace at Jamalpur and that fact was admitted.

     The Chief Justice ; How is it admissible ?

     Mr. Das: I objected to this.

     Mr. Norton : We wanted to show that he defied the law once.

     The Chief Justice: In other words you were proving the previous conviction during the trial.

     Mr. Das : The learned Sessions Judge himself referred to that and took that into consideration in coming to the conclusion whether this man was guilty or not. Not only it was as a fact which was proved but the findings of the judgment under which he was bound down were also put in and treated as evidence in the case. My submission is that it is wholly irrelevant.

     Mr. Das had not concluded when the Court rose for the day.

Page 254