The Alipore Bomb Trial

TWENTY-FIFTH DAY’S PROCEEDINGS

Mr. Norton continuing his address on behalf of the Crown said that when the court rose on Saturday he had brought their Lordship to the 15^th March, 1906, as being the date on which the first issue of the "Yugantar" appeared. In connection with that the registration of the "Yugantar " under the Press Act was on the 12^th March. It was stated to have been printed at the Kamala Press at 36, Bonomali Sircar’s Street. So regarding the details of the "Yugantar" he did not propose to trouble their Lordships at resent, but he would have to deal with the object and motives of the "Yugantar" at greater length when he would come to its connection with the "Mukti Kone Pathe" which was merely a condensed emanation of the "Yugantar".

     Historically it was worth while recollecting now that the Partition of Bengal in October, 1905, was not the commencement of this feeling of unrest and bitterness against the British Government. If the statement to which he had already alluded was true- and there was no reason to suppose it was not true—and if so far back as 1903, or 1904, Barindra Kumar Ghose had been perambulating the districts of Bengal, then it was quite clear that the unrest was attributable to causes which, according to those who were promulgating them, had arisen long prior to the date of the Partition.

     It was impossible to deny that the Partition—and probably honest1y—embittered and focussed the popular resentment, made it

Page 284

a fresh starting point and converted it into a convenient handle to accentuate the feelings which came into being long before the date of the Partition itself.

     Again with considerable skill from this point of view, the Partition was seized hold upon and was impressed into the general service of those who were embittered—or proposed to be embittered —against the English rule in this country and was used for the general purpose of inciting those feelings which had unfortunately resulted among other things, in this case.

     With regard to the Yugantar he would ask their Lordships to note that it was the parent of "Mukti Kon Pathe" which was nothing but a condensed selection of—some of the most. virulent of the "Yugantar" articles, not merely collected together, not merely printed and disseminated among the student population but collected and issued with extraordinary and significant haste as was evident from the preface to the second edition.

     The person responsible for that had failed to answer through his Counsel as to what was the necessity which prompted him to bring out this new edition in November, 1907, the first being in January of the same year, and the extraordinary haste in bringing out a fresh edition of the most virulent of the "Yugantar" articles.

     As that stood unexplained it was not unfair to impute to that person and to those behind him—that person was the lieutenant of Barindra Kumar Ghose—that this extraordinary haste indicated in his eyes and in the eyes of his associates the importance to be attached to these "Yugantar" articles in disseminating their views. It was therefore necessary that those articles should be reproduced and spread broadcast so that their doctrines might be more readily accessible to the persons whose heart they were trying to influence. That their Lordships would see from the statement o a witness who is dead.

     Continuing Mr. Norton said that witness was the father of one of the accused persons (Purna Sen)and he stated that the language of the "Yugantar" was grand. That was not the impassioned utterance of a boy but the mature deliberation of an old man.

     Mr. Norton then called their Lordships’ attention to the men who, he had evidence to show, were connected with the "Yugantar" They were Barindro, Abinash, Bhupendro Nath Dutt, one of the accused, absconding Sailendranath Bose, another accused, Taranath Roy Choudhury, an absconder against whom the case for the Crown was that he was one of the conspirators, Indra Nath Nandi, another accused, Sishir Kumar Ghose and Poresh Ghose who had absconded and who was one of the registered printers of the "Yugantar." When he would come to deal with the evidence he

Page 285

would be able to satisfy their Lordships that under Section 10 of the Evidence Act there was reasonable ground for believing that these persons were guilty of conspiracy.

     Counsel then went on to say that he would later on give their Lordships the language of the “Yugantar”. If he could satisfy their Lordships that the "Sandhya." was intended from its very outset to he one of the leading instruments by which Barindra and his conspirators intended and decided to reach and affect the imagination of the population to whom they particularly addressed themselves, then he would ask their Lordships to hold that the language of the “Yugantar" was well calculated to achieve that object and that Barindro preached independence in its fullest and extremist length and coupled with its expressions of intense racial hatred which, whether they were true or not, must necessarily have had a most pernicious effect in the minds of those to whom they were addressed.

     The keynote of those articles was not a form of Colonial Self government hut ultimate and absolute independence standing clear of any fetters political or otherwise. Continual reference was made to the out—raging of modesty of Indian women by British officials in this country and it was repeatedly declared that British officers had been violating temples. In fact there was an appeal to one’s worst passions but not one single argument had been adduced to support the statement made. If that was one of the vehicles by which the revolution was to be achieved then no more appropriate language could have been used than was used in the "Yugantar," the "Mukti Kone Pathe" and the "Sandhya."

     Mr. Norton then said that the next date in the history of his story was the 3^rd August, 1906, when the Chatra Bhander Limited Company was first registered. At its inception in 1903 the Chatra Bhandar was a purely honest mercantile venture and no exception could be taken to the reasons which led to the origination of that institution. However, as time went on the value of the Chatra Bhandar was appreciated as an organisation both in Calcutta and the mofussil and as a convenient vehicle for the dissemination of literature, those responsible for the "Yugantar" felt—and rightly from their point of view-that the Chhatra Bhandar even if the experiment was undertaken without the consent of the persons who primarily started it as a bona fide commercial venture, would nevertheless in their hands be a suitable conduit pipe for reaching and exciting the minds of the juvenile population.

     It was not a part of his argument to strive to show that the local Chhatra Bhandar in 1905 started branch organisation elsewhere. 'They said they failed to establish branches and he accepted that statement. If however they succeeded it was so

Page 286

much the worse for the prosecution. The failure of the local Chatra Bhandar to start branches elsewhere was more than made up by the fact that there had grown up a series of other Chatra Bhandars, especially at Midnapur, which became the local centre of sedition and revolution at which many of these men—Khudiram, Satyandra, Profulla and Nirmal—met and at which therefore there existed, what was essential for a conspiracy, namely, the opportunity for discussion, the opportunity for holding meetings, the opportunity for exchange of opinions and mutual information. It was that which the organisers of the "Yugantar" and the conspirators had set before them.

     Mr. Norton next referred to the prospectus of the Chatra Bhandar, Limited, which professed to be the pioneer Swadeshi concern for the benefit of the youths of the country, and said that to those responsible for this conspiracy the youth of the conspirators was one of the main influences. That was an element which must be taken into consideration in estimating the guilt of the many young men who were accused before their Lordships . In so far as they were youths, as to that being an excuse, Norton said that if they were not youths they could not have been conspirators. It was because they were young and because the value of their youth was appreciated by those who were forming this conspiracy that they were seduced. The older men the conspirators felt—and felt rightly—were not amenable to these influences. Those who organised this conspiracy felt it would be useless to try and influence the older and stable population of Bengal because they were open and susceptible to rewards from the Government. But one could not purchase a boy with a C. I. E. Those who gave them assistance for this unfortunate catastrophe were mainly young. He could not help stating the fact that Beachcroft in his judgment had been influenced by the fact that many of the accused were young. The question of the youth of the addressees was steadily kept in view by those who were writing these inflammatory appeals. The language used was no doubt designedly used. The youth of the country were flooded with pernicious eloquence those who were not and never would be ore this court.

     Mr. Norton then read the second issue of the prospectus of the Chatra Bhandar and said that as regards its language, both Mr. Das and Mr. Chuckerverti put forward the apology that a good deal of that was merely the sentimental imagination of the youth of the country who were addicted to practical imagery. That might be so. The question was whether this language was the mere use of forms to which they had been wedded from their birth, or was it used to convey a hidden and secret purpose. Reading it in connection with the rest of the documents in this case no other conclusion could be arrived at than that those who penned these words intended that the poverty of the nation should be used in

Page 287

inciting sectarian hatred and revolt. If the Chhatra Bhandar was merely an honest mercantile venture, it would be perfectly useless against Indra Nath Nandi or any one else.

     Counsel next referred to the advertisement of the “Yugantar"on the Chatra Bhandar prospectus and said, Mr. Chuckerverti suggested that prospectuses as a rule needed binding. His (Kr. Norton's) experience was all the other way. His experience was that prospectuses came on printed forms which had no cover at all. This prospectus was enclosed in a cover for the express purpose of giving the "Yugantar" a valuable method of publication and advertisement. he "Yugantar" also offered to pay for the cost of the cover and to relieve the Chhatra Bhandar of any expense.

     Their Lordships would not forget that one at least of those whose names appeared in the prospectus of the Chhatra Bhandar was associated with the "Yugantur". The Chatra Bhandar was associated with the “Yugantar". The Chhatra Bhandar was estimated at its value as an engine of reaching persons outside Calcutta and for that purpose — by consultation and in concert Indra Nath Nandi was selected as a fit and proper person to represent the conspirators on the Chatra Bhandar. Of course some of the persons whose name appeared on the Chhatra Bhandar might be absolutely respectable. The introduction of Indra Nath on that board was for that express purpose and it was not easy to suppose that his name had been put in there without his consent having been first obtained. Indra Nath was somewhat bolder than the rest of these boys, and his father was a man of position and was also a shareholder.

     Referring to the advertisement of the "Yuganter" on the Chhatra Bhandar prospectus, Mr. Norton said, the advertisement was headed “National freedom". He read the advertisement and said that was the view the "Yugantar" took. In the first issue of the Chatra Bhandar no mention was made of Indra Nath Nandi’s name. so far as the publication was concerned, it closed that portion of the year down to August.

     Then there came an incident worth noting. In September, 1906, Hem Chandra Das went to France. Both Mr. Mitter in the lower court and Mr. Das here said, the visit was for the puma of increasing Hem Chandra’s knowledge either as a photograph, printer or jeweller. These were the three alternatives put forward.

     Possibly Hem Chandra was a photographer and the chemicals found were necessary for that portion of his art. There was no evidence to show that he was a jeweller except that he had sent home some false rupees to his wife as a present. As regards painting there was absolutely no evidence.

Page 288

     Mr. Norton took it that Hem Chandra Das did not apparently go to France of his own accord. His departure in 1906 was in reference to the conspiracy which been started at any time at least one year before that as evidenced from the institution of the "Yugantar.” The Crown laid stress upon Hem Chandra Das as being of more than ordinary value in this case, first, because he was older than the rest, and secondly because he was a man of some means, having some property which brought him in Rs..100 monthly. Allusion been made by Counsel in this case to the letters written by Hem Chandra Das from Paris. That. was in order to enlist their Lordships' sympathies. Hem Chandra's statement in the letters that while in Paris he was working like a cooly, was a mere tour de force because he had not parted with his wife on the best of terms. Like man other husbands who found themselves behindhand in correspondence with their wives, Hem Chandra wanted to show his wife that his delay in writing was due to his hard work. Judging from his photograph taken in England, Hem Chandra was dressed like anything but a cooly. He was dressed in tweeds and looked happy, robust and contented.

     Mr. Norton then went on to say that on the 3^rd May, 1907, Indra Nath Nandi and Sudhir went up to Jamalpure. There they were arrested, tried and bound down to keep the peace. That showed that these young men were conversant with arms prior to this charge and were engaged in operations. which, Counsel submitted, were preparations for the r development in May

     On the 20^th May 1907, the Navasakti newspaper, continued Mr. Norton, was started. It various important roles in the lower Court. In this case however it play this important role in that it brought Tara Nath Boy Chaudhury on to the scene again as well as Abinash and through Abinash, who was the right- hand man of Barindra Kumar Gosh, it brought in the whole conspiracy.

     The case for the Crown with regard to the Navasakti was that, at a later sage, just before the arrest in May 1908 Abinash had printed a manifesto for, Counsel presumed, distribution throughout Bengal stating that the "Navasakti " which up to that time had not belonged to him but to other people, was going to be transferred and that the “Navasakti" was going to be placed in the hands of the hands of the staff of the “ Yugantar." That prospectus, however, was never issued and that transfer never actually came into operation. That document was intended to issue on the 9^th May and the conspirators were arrested on the 2^nd May.

     Mr. Norton asked their Lordships to take into consideration the discontent expressed in that notification by Abinash and

Page 289

through him by Barindra and the whole of the conspirators. If that was done, the views of the "Navasakti" became of importance. Finding the newspaper ready to their hands, the conspirators availed themselves of it to express the views of the “Yugantar." These views were to be circulated through the two fold medium of the "Navasakti” and the “Yugantar."

     Continuing Mr. Norton said that in June, 1907, came the Government warning to the newspapers. Mr. Norton was not there to defend the Government but the action of the Government with regard to that and with regard to their failure to prosecute the "Yugantar" at the early stage had been characterised as semi inducement to those young men to take the law into their own hands. It might possibly be that if the Government had been more active in their repressive measures the conspiracy might not have occurred. It was ungenerous to impute to the Government that they did not give any warning and that they refrained from taking any proceeding. It was ungenerous to attribute any unsympathetic attitude to the Government. As a matter, of fact that warning was given. They all know that Englishmen as a rule were averse to interference with the liberty of the and in this case they were blameable only for their and generosity and for nothing else.

     The Keshub Printing Works was started on the 15^th June, 1907. In connection with this Press Keshab, Basudev and Srimanto were convicted. The Sonar Bangla (Golden Bengal) a book, was discovered at the time when this Press was searched. Counsel then read extracts from Sonar Bangla and said that there was a connection between the pen which wrote the "Yugnatar" and the pen which wrote the Sonar Bangla—if they were not written by the same hand, there was no doubt that they were written under the same direction.

     On the 1^st July the "Yugantar" was first searched, and amongst other things- found there were manuscripts and proofs of the Bartaman Rananity and the Mukti Kone pathe. Then followed a series of Less prosecutions which continued till January 1908. On the the July, Bhupen was convicted. On the 26^th Sailendra was convicted and sentenced to three months. On the same date, Bepin Chandra Pal was also convicted and sentenced to six months. On the 27^th August, Susil got fifteen stripes. On the 28^th of the same month, the Sandhya was prosecuted East the Editor died in the course of the trial. On the 7^th September, Basanto was convicted and sentenced to {two yearn' ` rigorous imprisonment. Then again one Apurba was convicted and sentenced to three months. In October 1907; the Police first got information of the existence of the Secret Society in Calcutta. Then came the Seal’s Ledge, which was occupied by the conspirators

Page 290

from October till the end of March 1908. Prokash Chandra Bose, Sudhir, Upendra Nath, Barindra Kumar Ghose, Profulla Chaki and Sailendra Nath Bose were connected with this house. No one knew who Prokash was but the case for the prosecution was that it was an assumed name. Exhibit 118, a letter which purported to have come from Prokash, was really in the hand. writing of Barindra Kumar Ghose and it might be that it was an assumed name of Barindra.

     On the 5^th November, the first attempt was made at Chandernagore on the life of the Lieutenant-Governor. Ullaskar, Rishikesh, Naren Gossain, Barin and another boy were concerned in this attempt. Then some time before the 6^th December, there was a second attempt, and Bibhuti and Profulla were concerned in it Both these attempts were infructuous probably because the attempts were not scientific, Hem Chandra Das not having returned from France then. Then on the 3^rd Januar there was that Naraingarh incident and Barin, Profulla and Bibhuti were concerned in it. On the 4^th March 1908 a missionary gentleman named Higgenbotham was shot at Kustia. While on this point Counsel would draw their Lordships' attention to an exhibit which contained this curious entry "K. M. S." and under it “4-3-08." The case for the prosecution was that “K. M. S. "meant "Kustia missionary shot" and under it was the date. Mr. Norton then referred to an anonymous letter which was sent to Durga Charan Biswas, a pleader of Kustia.

     The Chief Justice: Was any of the incidents unknown to the public ?

     Mr. Norton : Oh no. The Chandernagar incident was unknown. The Kustia incident, the Naraingunge affair and the attempt on Mr. Allen were notorious.

     Mr. Norton then went on to deal with the shadowing witnesses. In one portion of the judgment the Sessions Judge had remarked that the evidence of the shadowing witnesses was not creditable. Their evidence, however, was not dishonest. Considering the evidence of the witnesses, it appears that the Judge did injustice to the police in not accepting them as truthful witnesses. With the exception of two witnesses the evidence of the other witnesses were on the whole accurate. Counsel then referred to the opinion of the Assessors with regard to the shadowing witnesses and said that the Judge was the judge of fact and not the Assessors.

     Mr. Norton then went on to deal with the shadowing witnesses giving the dates and the names of accused persons who were followed by the witnesses and the places where they were followed.

     Continuing Mr. Norton said that the Muzafferpur incident took place on the 30^th April and on the 2^nd May there was a raid in Calcutta and some of the appellants were arrested.

Page 291

     Mr. Norton then went on to deal with the Endings. He first dealt with the garden. The persons who were connected with the garden were Bariu, Indubhusan Boy, Ullaskar, Upendra Banerjee, Sudhir, Paresh, Bibhuti, Hem, Sishir, Krishnajihan, Rishikesh, Susil, Nirmal, Indra Nath, Bhababhusan and Birendra Chandra Sen. The value of the things found there would be about Rs 5,000. Where would they get money from ? They were not persons of means. From the fact that various plans were found there the prosecution would say that the appellants were intending to attack houses etc. for the purpose of collecting money. There was no direct evidence of any such attack. Mr. Norton then dealt with the various things found in the garden. Directly connected with the garden were the Seal’s Lodge and 15 Gopi Mohan Dutt’s Lane. No. 5 brought them in direct touch with 134, Harrison Bead and Shibpur because Ullaskar went there from 134, Harrison Road. Then came 30 Harrison Bead. Counsel next dealt with the Sylhet search and the search at 23, Scott's Lane. The next important searches were at the "Yugantar office, 4 Raja's Lane, 10-8 , Rani Sankari’s Lane, and Deoghar., After dealing with the findings of those places, Counsel submitted that coupling up all those things together it was impossible to come to any other conclusion than that those things were accumulated for the furtherance of a common design which could not be suggested to be benevolent or legal one. From those facts it was clear that the case for the prosecution had established positively a clear case which required an answer from the defence and the had not chosen to answer the charges, nor had they shaken the Crown case. That led almost conclusively to the suggestion of guilt.

     Mr. Norton then went on to deal with the seditious literature in the shape of the Yugantar, Mookti Kone Pathe and Bartantan Rananiity, and had not concluded reading extracts therefrom when the Court rose for the day.

Page 292