The Alipore Bomb Trial

FORTY-THIRD DAY’S PROCEEDINGS

     Mr. Das continuing his argument referred to the "Mukti Kon Pathe" and said that on the 1st July the proof sheets of this book were found and seized by the police in the "Yugantar" office. No action was taken by the police for several months and thinking that there was nothing wrong Abinash published the book. Counsel was proceeding on the assumption that Abinash did publish this book. If his story was true, as he said, it was no evidence of conspiracy.

     Carnduf J : Which story ?

     Mr. Das : What I am stating now.

     Carnduff, J : Assuming he did publish it.

     Mr. Das : Yes. He is responsible for the publication but that in itself is not evidence of conspiracy. He published it for pecuniary gain. He rightly or wrongly thought that the police not having taken action for so many months it was not objectionable from their point of view. My learned friend’s answer to that was that even if it was published for money that money was intended for nefarious purposes. There is no evidence of that. In fact the evidence is against that. Your Lordships don’t find the sale proceeds of the " Mukti Kon Pathe " in the garden account books or in the account books found at 134 Harrison Road and 15, Gopi Mohan Dutt’s

Page 339

Lane. It is not clear on the evidence that his intention was to do some thing in furtherance of the object of this particular conspiracy. I admit that his action may be regarded with suspicion. One may be naturally inclined to give that interpretation to his action, but unless there is other evidence connecting hin1 with the conspiracy that suspicion in itself is valueless. Is there anything in the introduction which shows such an intention as is necessary under Section 124A.. It is merely an essay on the importance of what he calls aggregate, or conjoint action in which the individual must subordinate himself to the interests of the aggregate. The rest of the book consists of reprints from the " Yugantar" That is not disputed. I submit that there is nothing wrong in the object as stated by the man himself, namely, the ideal of freedom such as is contained in this introduction. Your Lordships will find the same ideal in many of the papers put in and many of the books published during that time.

     Mr. Das then referred to the " Bartaman Rananity" (modern art of warfare) and said that it was published on the 7^th October, 1907. There was nothing in the book itself which showed that it was published in furtherance of the object of tl1e conspiracy. There might be objectionable passages in the " Mukti Kon Pathe" in the articles reprinted from the " Yugantar", but there was nothing objectionable in the "Bartaman Rananity" which was merely a scientific treatise. The whole of the " Bartaman Rananity " was reprinted from the " Yugantar" His learned friend had said that one or two paragraphs had been added in the article. Assuming that was so there was nothing objectionable in those one or two paragraphs.

     Carnduff J: The whole book is merely reprinted from the "Yugantar” ?

     Mr. Das: My friend’s contention is that the publication of this book was in furtherance of the object of the conspiracy. I submit that that does not at all follow. It may merely be an expression of a man’s feeling. It is not possible for you to have a correct idea of a writing of this kind unless your Lordships place yourselves in the position of the writer. I submit that the fact that " Bartaman Rananity " has been found in the houses of some persons during the different searches is no proof of conspiracy.

     Mr. Das next took up the case of Sailendra. He said there was no reference against this appellant in the garden. The evidence against him was his association with the " Yugantar" and with the Sil’s Lodge. Apart from the assault on the Police, which had nothing to do with the present case there was no other evidence connecting Sailendra with the conspiracy. The evidence on record connecting the appellant with the garden was of such a character that their Lordships could not rely on it.

Page 340

Counsel said that his observations on the evidence against Abinash applied with equal force in the case of Sailendra.

     Referring to the case of Sudhir Mr. Das first of all drew their Lordships’ attention to the confession made by the appellant. He admitted having assisted in the publication of the Yugantar. This confession was obtained by the police by inducement and pressure. . But the confession did not show that he was a conspirator. Apart from this confession there was nothing in the evidence to show that Sudhir had agreed to the general objects of the conspiracy. The documentary evidence connecting him with the garden was no evidence of his complicity in the conspiracy.

     Continuing Mr. Das said that Mr. Norton had referred to parcel No. 30 which went to Deoghar and was redirected to Calcutta. The two accounts, the Calcutta account and the Deoghar account in connection with the parcel, however, did not tally. As regards Sudhir‘s presence at the Sil’s lodge it depended on oral evidence of two witnesses which looked suspicious. It had not been proved that he had ever been at the Sil’s Lodge and even if it was proved, it did not show that he was a conspirator. Over and above that he was found not guilty by both the assessors and their Lordships would take that into consideration.

     With reference to Abinash, Sailendra and Sudhir, Mr. Das . submitted that the case against them was due more or less to the fact that the prosecution wanted to connect Arabinda through them.

     Continuing Mr. Das said that he would next deal with the case of persons who were arrested outside the garden. He would begin with the case against Hem Chandra Das. With regard to this case the real difficulty was that both the Sessions Judge and Mr. Norton had begun with the confession and made that a foundation of the case whereas what should be done was that their Lordships would first consider the evidence, and if they found the evidence sufficient then they would turn to the confession. Taking the whole of the evidence as it was on the record it was clear that no case was made out against Hem Chander Das. So far as the watch witnesses were concerned the evidence was very meagre. Nothing incriminating was found in his house.

     At this stage the Court rose for the day.

Page 341