The Alipore Bomb Trial

TWENTY – FOURTH DAY’S PROCEEDINGS

 Mr. Chuckervarti continuing his address on behalf of Indra Nath Nandi said he had only a very few observations to make with regard to the judgment in the .Jamalpur case. His submission was that that judgment was not admissible in evidence in support of the previous conviction and that was admitted. It was not admissible as a fact showing either the state of mind or intention of a person within the meaning of section I4 of the Evidence Act. He understood Mr. Norton to suggest that it was evidence under section 14 of the Evidence Act. In point of fact the judgment and conviction was not a " fact" within the meaning of the section as showing the "intention" of  Indra Nath. On the contrary it was an opinion formed by a tribunal on certain evidence. Nor was it evidence under section 15 of the same Act as shown whether any act was accidental or intentional. The class of cases covered by sections 14 and 15 of the Evidence Act was described by the learned author in paragrah 784. There the learned author referred to sections I4 and 15 and various illustrations under those sections. What was alleged was that Indra Nath and Sudhir were in company with two local men of Jamalpur and as there was an apprehension of a disturbance between the Hindus and Mahomedans being caused by these persons they were bound down under section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code to keep the peace. Counsel could not understand how that could possibly be used as evidence for establishing the association with the offence of waging war against the King. That occurrence was in April, 1907. As regards this part of the case Counsel preferred to wait before making his submission until he had heard Mr. Norton as to how the latter proposed to establish a connection between Indra Nath being bound down to keep the peace in April 1907 and the offence of waging war against the King.

     That, said Mr. Chuckravarti, was the whole of the evidence affecting his client and he would now draw their Lordship’s attention to Indra Nath’s statements before the committing Magistrate and his statement in the Court of Session.

     There was one point to which he desired to draw their Lordship's attention now. Even assuming that the search, the arrest an the sanction of the Government were all illegal, he was afraid he could not say that on that ground the trial was bed. But

Page 280

he was going to make his submission from this point of view, namely that a Crown prosecution was a prosecution for the ends of justice, to bring a man to justice. If a man had broken the law he must take the punishment which the law awarded. On the other hand if he was an innocent man it was a grievous wrong that he should be convicted. Therefore if he could show their Lordships that the police were the masters of the situation, that they initiated the proceedings by breaches of the law and by breaking the formalities of the law devised for the purposes of the protection of the citizen and if it was shown that the object of the prosecution was not to bring offenders to justice but to run in A or B or C, then the prosecution could not complain if its conduct was criticised in this way.

      In this connection Counsel read a passage from the charge to the Jury of Chief Justice Cockburn in the case of Regina against Bolton reported in 12 Cox, page 87. Continuing Counsel said that he could not conceive, if the object of the prosecution was to run in the man at any cost, that the whole case should not have been first placed before Counsel and Solicitor for the Crown and that sanction to prosecute obtained in the regular way.

     Mr. Chuckerverty next referred briefly to the law points relating to the cognisance of the Magistrate and the legality of the Government sanction.

     Counsel next referred to the case of Regina against Harvey reported in 11, Coxe, page 574. He also cited the case of Foster and Finlayson at page 490, but thought that would hardly assist their Lordships. He then read Best on Evidence, 10^th edition, page 247.

     The Chief Justice: There is a Government expert in handwriting.

     Mr. Chukerverti : Yes.

     The Chief Justice : Was he not called ?

     Mr. Chuckerverti: No. I think Mr. Das has submitted that there are traces on the record that some documents were sent to the Government expert for the purpose of examination.

     Mr. Norton then began his address on behalf of the Crown. He said he proposed to give their Lordships a short and condensed story in the shape of a narrative of what the case for the Crown really was. Hitherto they had only been able to make up piece-meal from various documents and various isolated passages in the judgment what the case for the Crown really was. He would also try to make the narrative from the confessions as he wished to show the narrative really corroborated, and was corroborated by the confessions and by that method enhanced the value of the confessions.

Page 281

     In 1903 or 1904 Barindra Kumar Ghose, so far as the conspiracy was concerned, came down to Bengal from Baroda from the companionship of his brother Arobindo Ghosh. Now Arabindo had been acquitted and Mr. Norton was not going to make the faintest suggestion that Arabindo was guilty. But it was necessary to recollect for the purposes of certain documents which Counsel would have to place before their Lordships that there was the closest relationship of blood between Arabindo and Barindra in order that their Lordships might draw the inference which he would ask them to draw as to certain important documents which passed between the brothers.

     Barindra came to Bengal and preached independence for two years. At the very earliest moment that he came into touch with Arabindra his mission-and Barindro made no secret of it—was independence, complete, final and decisive. After preaching this gospel of independence here for two years Bnrindra went back to Baroda and with his brother studied there for one year.

     In the interval, continued Mr. Norton, certain important occurrences had taken place which it was important to remember. The first was the Partition of Bengal which took place on the 15^th October 1905. Almost concurrent with that act the doctrine of Swadeshi had been introduced and became the fashion through- out the length and breadth of Bengal, and with it its attendant satellites of boycotting and picketing. He referred to that to show that although he could not rove any part of the Swadeshi movement, the boycott or the picketing were directly connected with the conspiracy, yet in a manner they paved the way for what followed.

     At any rate on Barindro's return to Bengal he found the field well manured for his purpose and that any seed sowed then would fructify and multiply.

     On the 2^nd  November, 1908, the Sandhya newspaper, which was responsible for a good deal of evil, came into existence. The Editor of the Sandhya was a man named Brahmo Baudhab Upadhaya and he eventually died on the 17^th October, 1907, while undergoing his trial for sedition. That was a period of activity and political recrudescence and Mr. Kingsford was engaged in passing severe sentences—Mr. Norton would not say too severe—on certain journals in Bengal.

     With a certain amount of skill and political foresight, remarked Mr. Norton, Barindro made use of the fact that it was among the student population of Bengal that the agitation had mostly found a home. Barindro availed himself of the material he found ready made to his hand in the shape of a very large number of young boys, inflammable to a degree to which his elder countrymen were not amenable. Barindra recognised therefore that to carry

Page 282

his doctrines into precept he must turn not to the stable population of Bengal but to young boys, whose minds were more easily influenced through their hearts.

     With considerable statesmanship Barindra recognised that the shortest and surest way to the hearts of the young men he intended to recruit from was to inculcate into them the principles of religion. Barindra evidently followed the principle that the sword struck more strongly from the hand the owner of which believed he was guided by divine inspiration.

     Mr. Norton did not say that Barindra was a black traitor Many of these young men might have been impelled to act as they did under the belief that what they were doing was for the good of the country.

     Religion, however played a prominent part in this matter. That was clearly shown by the fact that the Gita., the Upanishad and other religious books were found in almost every search.

     That the object, however, was not to send out a band of missionaries or religious workers was evidenced by the fact that with considerable strategy the Society was divided into three departments, namely, the mechanical, the intellectual and the spiritual. Over the spiritual department Upendra Nath Banerjee, of whom Counsel would say more later on, presided.

     Counsel then referred to the pernicious influence exercised by the Mukti Kona Pathe and the Jugantar and said that he held Barindra responsible for the Jugantar the doctrine of which was "men, money, weapons." Those were the three factors without which no revolution could hope to be complete.

     In February 1906, continued Mr. Norton, they found at Midnapur, which throughout this case played an extremely important role, that Khudiram, who himself played a very active part, was arrested with a seditious leaflet. A copy or duplicate of this seditious leaflet was found in the house of Bijoy Chandra Bhattacharjee, who had been acquitted. Bejoy attributed that as belonging to Chandra Kanta Chuckerbutty, one of the principal conspirators, who had absconded and for whose arrest a warrant had been issued. Khudiram was one of the two men who committed the Mozaferpore murder.

     Mr. Norton there read the pamphlet which was headed. “The Partition of Bengal" and characterised it as an inflammatory appeal to the people.

     What, asked Counsel, would be the probable effect of placing a document like this in the hands of the young men to whom it was addressed ? One could scarcely be surprised at the result if this was the class of literature distributed throughout the country. The result was that it led to these unfortunate boys being placed

Page 283

on their trial, convicted and sentenced for the offences with which they had been charged. This, in connection with the articles in the Yugantar and the Sandhya, as their Lordships would see, was the class of weapon which Barindra selected for his purpose.

     Khudiram's death, said Mr. Norton, might be fairly attributed to the influence of Barindra.

     Barindra. had in the main debauched the youth of Bengal and it was possible for Khudiram—among others—to be inflated to such an extent of religious ecstasy that the murders of Mrs. and Miss Kennedy by mistake for Mr. Kingsford followed.

     On the 15^th of March 1906, said Mr. Norton, the first issue of the "Yugantar" came into existence. Barindra, himself selected the "Yugantar" as one of the direct weapons for the purpose of securing a revolution. It did not matter whether they were preparing for a far-off revolution or a revolution in the immediate future. he law made no such distinction.

     The moment that two of these persons conspired to wage war the offence was complete even if no overt acts were committed.

Page 284