The Alipore Bomb Trial

SECOND DAY’S PROCEEDINGS

     His Lordship resumed the further hearing of the Alipore bomb case reference when Babu Bejoy Krishna Bose continued his argument on behalf of Sailendra Nath Bose and Krishnajibon Sanyal.

     The Vakil observed that the Muraripukar garden was used as a monastery for imparting religious and political training, and the Goabagan house was used for making bombs in November and December. This was evident from the confessions of Ullaskar Dutt and Rishikesh Kanjilal. The appellants were found in the garden in the garb of Sanyasis. It was also in evidence and that was the case for the prosecution that new recruits were given religious training at first and afterwards they were gradually acquainted with the objects of the society. Krishnajiban went to the garden in the middle of October. Moreover there was nothing in the garden, as admitted by the prosecution, to arouse suspicion. There was

Page 400

nothing unusual when it was said that Krishnajiban went to the garden to learn Geeta.

     Regarding Sailendra’s connection with the Yugantar the vakil said that being a co-villager of Abinasb Chander Bhattacharjee, manager of the Yugantar, he was for some time in the Yugantar office. It was true that for a short time he was sub-manager of that paper, but there was !no evidence to show that Sailendra had anything to do with the policy of the paper. It could not be said that because a man was found in the Yugantar office he was guilty. Dindayal Bose who lived in that office was acquitted. Not a scrap of paper was found in Yugantar searches which bore the name of Sailendra Bose. Much had been made by the prosecution in respect of a post card found in 48, Grey Street. This was a Yugantar post card on which Sailendra was said to have written a letter to a friend of his. The post card bore the name of Yugantar and a couplet from the Geeta in which Sri Krishna said that he would appear again and again on this earth to save the holy and destroy the wicked. Mr. Justice Carnduff in his judgment had said that the mere fact of his using the Yugantar postcard showed that Sailendra had a great liking for those postcards. The vakil said that there was evidence to show that these postcards were extensively sold in the market. A search-witness Serajuddin deposed that he had purchased several such postcards from hawkers. Apparently they had nothing to do with the Yugantar.

     Referring to Sailendra’s association with other members of the society the vakil observed that no doubt his association with Abinash Chandra Bhattacharjee, a leading conspirator, told against Sailendra but that in itself did not prove his guilt. Both Abinash and Sailendra came from the same village Arbalia and it was no wonder that from' time to time they lived together. Both the Assessors found him not guilty of all the charges but the Sessions Judge disposed of his case in a few short sentences. The Chief Justice observed that he had considerable anxiety in his mind because of Sailendra’s connection with the Yuguntar. The vakil submitted that, for this accidental connection with the Yugantar undue suspicion should not be attached.

     As regards Sailendra’s connection with the Seal’s Lodge, the vakil submitted that this connection was based on the evidence of only one witness. Hiralal, a postal clerk, and formerly postmaster of Rohini post office, identified Sailendra as one of the persons living in the Seal’s Lodge. This witness was at Rohini only for five weeks and he was not cross-examined on behalf of Sailendra as he was unrepresented at that time. Sailendra was not identified by the post peon who usually came to the Seal’s Lodge to deliver letters nor by the next-door neighbour who was cited by the prosecution.

Page 401

     Of the documentary evidence there was only one against Sailendra. It was exhibit 78 found in the garden inside a note book. This document bore the signature "S.B." The vakil submitted it did not necessarily refer to Sailendra. It might refer to Sailendra Bose of Midnapore who was hanged for the murder of the approver or it might refer to Sudhir Kumar Bagchi Sircar.

     Regarding oral evidence the vakil submitted that a watch witness said that he saw Sailendra at the garden. He identified Sailendra generally. Although he gave a graphic description of everything he saw in the garden from 20th April to 26t April, he did not mention Sailendra's name in any of his reports. This was not because he did not know Sailendra, for he had admitted that he heard his name in March. He said he saw Sailendra entering the garden from Duni Seal’s garden, but it was in evidence that the gate of the garden was not visible from Duni Seal's garden. The Sessions Judge and the Assessors visited the garden and they were also of the same opinion. Evidently this witness was not a truthful witness. The vakil next read passages from the evidence of other watch witnesses who spoke in regard to Sailendra.

Page 402