The Alipore Bomb Trial

THIRTY-SECOND DAY’S PROCEEDINGS 

     Mr. Norton continuing his address took up the case of Hrishi Kesh. On the 11^th May Rishikesh made a confessional statement and was also implicated by the confessional statements of Barindra Kumar Ghosh and Ulhskar Dutt.

     Mr. Norton then referred to the various documents, which, the prosecution alleged, showed Rishikesh connection with the conspiracy. Judging from his confession Rishikesh’s vindictiveness against British Rule would probably tempt him to in as man men as he could. The phrase "preaching the new cult" which occurred in one of the documents, said Counsel, could not mean anything but assassination.

     Mr .Norton: His name is not mentioned in any of the confession. The absence of his name rather fits in with the theory I was advancing on Monday that the confessions of the 4^th only implicate those who were arrested up to that date. This boy was arrested on the 10^th .

     Counsel continuing said :―Ullaskar Dutt, Indu Bhusan Boy, Upendra Nath Banerji and Rishikesh Kanjilal declined to say anything. The others made statements with which Counsel would deal later. Although Rishikesh withdrew his statement before Mr. Beachcroft he id not my it was false.

Page 307

     Mr. Norton then dealt with the case of Krishna. Jiban Sanyal, another boy who made a statement. Counsel said Krishna Jiban was arrested at Maldah on the 12^th May. He came to Calcutta with Norendra Nath Baxi who had been acquitted.

     Among the documents found at the garden said Counsel, were some school books, which, the prosecution alleged, belonged to Krishnajiban.

     Mr. Das admitted that the school books were Krishnajiban’s.

     Continuing Mr. Norton said that in a box was found a pocket book with a piece of paper having the names and prices of certain books on it. Among the books named on that piece of paper were "Garibaldi," "Russo-Japanese War" and "Human Bullets." The names of those books were interesting because the general purpose of the conspiracy was revolution and for the purposes of that conspiracy the conspirators wanted knowledge.

     In Krishna Jiban’s house were also found thirty-nine copies of the Yugantar of various dates, some of the copies dating back to 1906. That was probably the origin of Krishna Jiban’s subsequent action. .

     The Chief Justice: On his own statement he was in the garden for a very short time. He is young and the question is whether these conspirators who, according to you, are men of light, would allow this lad to come in.

     Mr. Norton: They might not allow him to come in to the extent of taking an actual physical part in any overt enterprise, but that they intended to use him for other purposes is perfectly clear. They may not have allowed lads to take part in any overt acts but they utilised them for the purpose of procuring money. That brings him at once within the illustration and meaning of section 10 Evidence Act. His object was not to wage war but to contribute money for waging war. He had become impregnated with the noxious doctrines preached by the "Yugantar" for a year and a half before he came down to the garden. It may be, as Mr. Beachcroft says, that he has been more sinned against than sinning. Mr. Beachcroft may have been very much impressed with his youth.

     The Chief Justice: All that may show that he was not a party to the real conspiracy.

     Mr. Norton: It may show that he was not a party to some of the real acts of the conspiracy. My argument is that he was ' an assenting party to some of the general acts for waging war. As soon as he becomes an assenting party he is as guilty in law as the man who naturally takes a cannon and points it at the Government House. According to Barindra, Upendra Nath and other leaders

Page 308

had discussed the question of the assassination of the Viceroy and there is nothing to show that it was not an open discussion.

     The Chief Justice: If we accept Krishna Jiban’s statement he told us what lectures he attended.

     Mr. Norton: Yes.

     The Chief Justice : Two lectures on explosives.

     Mr. Norton: Yes. If he attended such lectures and saw a number of young men there, it is impossible to say that he did not know what their purpose was. The suspicion then arises that he must have been aware of what they were going to do. Although he may not have been taken into the actual secrets, it is not difficult to say that in consequence of his comparative youth he was not to take part in any overt acts but to furnish the sinews of war. I do not want to press the case against this young man unduly, but the hand of a boy of sixteen is quite as capable of pulling a trigger or throwing a bomb as a man of thirty—two.

     Counsel then read the confession which was made by Krishna Jiban Sanyal.

     The Chief Justice: What seems to be in Krishna Jiban's favour among other things is this :—He made the statement without any apparent endeavour to save himself. Supposing we take his statement in its entirety, can we say on that he was a party to the conspiracy? Assuming that there was a conspiracy he was in a very dangerous neighbourhood no doubt ?

     Mr. Norton : No. On itself we cannot.

     The Chief Justice : I think you are right.

     Mr. Norton : If I were in the position of a Judge I would not convict him on that alone. But the real value of the statement is the light it gets from other collateral circumstances. There were two facts against him, namely, his previous connection with the "Yugantar" and his association with the garden. I quite admit that his youth is a matter to be taken into consideration, but if the facts establish the guilt, then I submit, it is a question of sentence.

     Mr. Norton then dealt with the case against Hem Chandra Dass, who was arrested at 38-4, Raja Naba Kishen Street. He was implicated by Barin, Ullaskar and Upen. Hem Chandra had been a very cautions man throughout. He made no statement before Mr. Birley and refused to give his name and even sign his statement. His house was searched once on the 2^nd May and again on the 3^rd May, but nothing incriminating was found there and the answer to that was that one would not expect to find any incriminating things at his house, because everything was removed

Page 309

from that house on the 21^st April. This was the man who went to Paris, the case for the prosecution being that he went there for the purpose of learning bomb-making. This appellant, the Crown admitted, had some idea of photography and he had a desire to deal in jewellery, possibly for the purpose of increasing his own income.

     The Court then rose for the day.

Page 310