w
\
1
LflW
RELATING
TO
PRESS AND SEDITION
BY
G. K. ROY,
(RAI SAHIB.)
Superintendent (retired) Gouernment of India, Home Department.
(Author of the Indian Arms Act Manual,
Collection of Rules and Orders relating to Public Servants; •
Copyright Act and Regulations and Laws relating to Press in India ; '
Brief History of Lahore; etc,,)
Rs. 5.
1915
AT THE STATION PRESS, SIMLA.
DEDICATED,
BY
KIND PERMISSION,
TO
THE HON'BLE MR. H. WHEELER, G 8.I., G.I.E., I.G.8.,
Secretary to the
Government of India, Home Department.
474?
LAW
RELATING TO
PRESS AND SEDITION.
PAGES,
L The Press and Registration of Books Act, XXV of 1867 ... 1-8
2. The Dramatic Performances Act, XIX of 1876, with
Statement of Objects and Reasons ... ... 8-10
3. An Act to amend the Indian Penal Code, IV of 1898,
with Statement of Objects and Reasons, Notes on
Clauses, Report of Select Committee, Minutes of
Dissent and frotes ... ... ... ... 11-26
4. Section, 108, Criminal Procedure Code, V of 1898,
with Extracts from Select Committee's Report,
Minutes of Dissent, and Notes. ... ... 27-29
6. The Explosive Substances Act, VI of 1908, with State-
ment of Objects and Reasons and Notes ... ... 29-34
6. The Newspapers (Incitements to Offences) Act, VII of
1908, with Statement of Objects and Reasons and
Notes ... ... ... ... ... 35-38
7. The Indian Criminal Law Amendment Act, XIV of
1 908, with Statement of Objects and Reasons, and
Notes ... ... ... ... ... 39-44
8. The Indian Press Act, I of 1910. with Statement of
Objects and Reasons, Select Committee's Report and
Minutes of Dissent by the Hon'ble Messrs. G. K.
Gokhale, R. N. Mudholkar and M. M. Malaviya, and
Notes ... ... ... ... ... 45-58
9. The Prevention of Seditious Meetings Act, X of 1911,
with Statement of Objects and Reasons, Select
Committee's Report, Notes of Dissent by the Hon'ble
Messrs. G. K. Gokhale, B. N. Basu, M, Haque and
R. N, Mudholkar ... ... ... ... 59-62
10. The Indian Criminal Law Amendment Act, VIII of
1913, with Statement of Objects and Reasons, Select
Committee's Report, Note of Dissent by the Hon'ble
Mr. M. M. Malaviya and Notes ... ... .... 62-68
11. The Indian Naval and Military News Emergency
Ordinance, I of 1 914; as extended by The Emergency
Legislation Continuance Act, I of 1915 ... ... 68-70
12. (1) The Defence of India [Criminal Law Amendment]
Act, IV of 1915, with Statement of Objects^and
Reasons and proceedings of the Legislative Council
of the Governor-General ... ... ... 71-121
(2) Defence of India Rules published with the Home
Department Notification No. 1196, dated the 2nd
April 1915, as amended by subsequent notifications
(3) The Defence of India (Military) Rules, published
' with Notification No. 693 in the Gazette of India
dated the 24th July 1915 ... ...
(3) Home Department Notifications No. 1095, dated
the 22nd March 3915, No. 1379 dated the 23rd
April 1915 and No. 1789 dated the 10th June 1915
applying sections 3 to 11 of the Defence Act to
tnin districts in the Punjab and in the Presidency
ot
..
(4) Foreign Department Notifications Nos. 1047,
k dated the 8th June 1915 No, 1811 dated the 17th
August 1915, applying the Defence Rules to
Berar ... ... ... ... ...
(5) Government of the Punjab Notification No. 560,
dated the 7th April 1915, publishing rules under
section 10 of the Defence Act ... ..
(6) Government of Bengal Notification No. 1198,
dated the 2nd June 1915, publishing rules under
section 10 of the Defence Act ... ..
(7) Home Department Notification No. 3208, dated
the 22nd September 1915, applying sections 3 to 11
of the Defence Act to Balasore in Bihar and Orissa ...
(8) Home Department Notification No. 3412, dated
the 7th October 191 5, apply ing sections 3 to 11 of
Defence Act to Benares in the United Provinces ...
(9) Lahore Conspiracy Case — (Result of the find-
ings) ... ... ... ...
13. Letter, dated the 6th August 1909, from Lord Minto
to Ruling Chiefs and their replies ... ,..
14. His Excellency Lord Hardinge's speech, dated the
27th January 1913 and 17th September 1913 ...
15. Calcutta High Court Judgment, dated the 1st Sep-
tember 1910 in the matter of Muhammad Ali ...
16. Resolution moved by the Hon'ble Mr. Surendra Nath
Banerjee to amend the Press Act and Debates in the
Legislative Council of the 9th January 1914 thereon...
17. Rules issued under the Press Act I of 1910 by the
Chief Court, Punjab ... ... ...
18. Foreign Department Notification No. 1387, dated
the llth August 1914, applying the Naval and
Military News Ordinance of 1914, to certain areas ...
19. Index ... ...
PAGES.
121-123
123-127
127-129
129-130
130-132
132-134
135
135
135
136-185
185-188
189-199
199-235
235-237
238
i-vi
LAW RELATING TO PRESS AND SEDITION.
CORRECTIONS.
Page 4, line 48, add " and " before " shall "
„ 5, „ 20, omit " of " after " such copies "
„ 8, „ 33, for " if is be " read " if it be "
13, „ 11, for " Magisty " read " Majesty "
17, Illustration (d) for " Disguilty " read "D is guilty "
21, line 45, omit " and " after " under "
43, Note (4) line 5, for "indentical" read "identical"
43, „ (5) „ 4, for " offeece " read " offence "
„ 45, Heading for " Indin " read « Indian "
54, section 10, line 7, for " then " read " tl
,, tj-r, oGi/uiisii iv, 11 LIC i ; lui LUCII i/ciAu. than
59, lines 26 and 32, " for tranquility " read " tranquillity "
61, section 6 (1), line 3, for "sections" read "section"
„ 70, section 10, line 4, for " preceding " read "proceeding"
„ 83, „ 26, for "of at "read "of a"
„ 88, „ 18, omit the word " law "
„ 89, first line of last paragraph for " his " read " this "
„ 95, „ 40, for " thing " read ' think "
„ 1 07, „ 11, for " calause " read " clause "
„ 107, „ 26, for " except " read " accept "
„ 116, „ 4, add " which " before " stands "
„ 117, Act IV of 1915, section 2(1) (6), for "or Allies^ read "of Allies'
„ 118, „ „ section 2 (2 ) Hue 3, for " way " read " may "
„ 119, „ „ section 3 (1) line 2, add " of" after "accused"
„ 120, line 6, for " sentenced f> read " sentence "
., 127, „ 32, add "sections "before "3 to 11"
„ 129, last line for " or all " read « all or "
„ 130, line 17 for "members" read "member"
„ 133, para. 6, line 4, for "on claims to," read "or claims to"
134, para. 10, line 2 for "sentenced" read "sentence "
183, line 7 for " of poison " read " poison of"
1 83, „ 22, for " has " read " have "
188, „ 1 9, for " Septembder " read " September "
1 83, „ 34, for " perpretators " read " perpetrators "
201, para. 3, line 6, for "the quote" read "quote the"
Page 56, substitute the following for section 23.
23. (/) Whoever keeps in his possession a press for the printing of
Penalty for keeping press books or papers without making a deposit under
or publishing newspaper section 3 or section 5, when required so to do, shall
without making deposit. on conviction by a Magistrate be liable to the
penalty to which he would be liable if he had failed to make the declaration
prescribed by section 4 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867.
^2) Whoever publishes any newspaper without making a deposit
under section 8 or section 10, when required so to do, or publishes
such newspaper knowing that such security has not been deposited,
shall, on conviction by a Magistrate, be liable to the penalty to which he
would be liable if he had failed to make the declaration prescribed by
section 5 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867.
LAW OF PRESS AND SEDITION.
Press and Registration of Books Act No. xxv
of 1&76.
[WndMarck T867},
An Act for the regulation of printing-presses and Newspapers, for. the
preservation of copies of books printed in British India, and for the
registration of such books [As amended by Act X of 1890 and Acts III
and X of 191 4>
Whereas it is expedient to provide for the regulation of printing-
presses and of periodicals containing news, for
Preamble. ^Q preservation of copies of every book printed
or lithographed in British India, and for the registration of such books;
It is hereby enacted as follows : —
PART I.— PRELIMINARY.
In this Act, unless there shall be something repugnant in the subject
or context. —
Interpretation clause,
" book " includes every volume, part or division of a volume, and
"Books" pamphlet, in any language, and every sheet of
music, map, chart or plan separately printed or
lithographed.
" British India " means the territories which are or shall be vested in
Her Majesty or Her Successors by the Statute
21 and 22 Viet., cap. 106 (An Act for the better
Government of India."]
"Magistrate" means any person exercising the full powers of a
„ Magistrate, and includes a Magistrate of Police.
<M tl££lS vTcVbB*
* * * *
And in every part of British India to which this Act shall extend,
-Local Government .» " ^?ca.1 government » shall mean the person
authorized by law to administer executive
government in such part, and includes a Chief Commissioner.
2. [Repeal of Act XI of 1835] Rep. Act XIV of 1870.
PART II.— OF PRINTING-PRESSES AND NEWSPAPERS.
3. Every book or paper printed within British India shall have
Particulars to be printed printed legibly on it the name of the printer
on book s and papers. and the place of printing, and (if the book or
paper be published) [the name] of the publisher and the place of publica-
tion.
The accused caused to be printed copies of certain books, which were previously
printed at the Government Press, Allahabad, and offered them for sale. Some of the books
2 PRESS AND REGISTRATION OF BOOKS ACT,
did not contain the name of the printer and the place of printing or the name of the publisher
and the place of publication. Other books had printed upon them the words " Govern-
ment Press, Allahabad. " ffeld, that in respect of the former set of books, the accused
was properly convicted under section 12 of Act XXV of 1867, for, a man who cause*
a book to be printed and offers it to the public for sale is a publisher, within the meaning
«f sections 3 and 12, that in respect of the latter set of books the accused was guilty of
an offence under section 12. A- W. N, 1887, 95.
A newspaper was printed and published bearing the following words j " Printed and
published at Cochin for the Malabar Economic Company at the Company's Goshree Vilasam
Press." Held that these words did not satisfy the requirements of Act XXV cf 1867.
Queen Empress v Hari Shenoy, 16 Mad. 44&
The word " publisher " has been nsed in the Printing Presses and Newspapers Act
(XXV of 1S67) in the restricted sense and does not include a person who merely sells a
book or a paper.
Queen Empress tr. Banka Patni, 23 Cal. 414.
Held that the rule in section 3 of Act XXV of 1876 requires that every paper printed and
published in British India shall have legibly printed on it the name of the printer and the
place of printing and the name of the publisher and place of publication as such. An
omission to comply with section 3 is punishable under section 12— Sections 3 and 4 do not
deal with intention. Printers and publishers cannot be allowed to select for themselves-
the description to be used in professing to comply with the Act, but they must use the
descriptions prescribed by the Act. '
The Crown v. Bhawani Dass. P, R. 1909, 5 Cr.
4. No person shall, within British India, keep in his possession any
Keeper of printing-press to press for the printing of books or papers, who-
make declaration, shall not have made and subscribed the fol-
lowing declaration before the Magistrate within whose local jurisdiction
such press may be : —
" I, A. B.j declare that I have a press for printing at ~ ."
And this last blank shall be filled up with a true and precise descrip-
tion of the place where such press may be situate.
(1) The accused had made a declaration, under s, 4 of the Act that he was the owner of
a press called the " Atrnaram Press ", The management of the press was carried on by
another person who looked after the whole concern. At this press was printed a bulky
book which purported to be one devoted to metaphysics and philosophy and was styled
"Ekashloki Gita." It was a book that dealt to a large extent with metaphysics, philosophy
and religion. It alsojcontained seditious matter scattered among discussions of religious
matters. The accused took no part in the management of the press ; nor did it appear that
he had read the book or acquainted himself with the nature of it. He was charged with the
offence made punishable under s. 124A, Penal Code, and convicted of the same. — ffeld (I)
that the cumulative effects of the surrounding circumstances was such »s to make it as
probable that the accused had not read the book or that he had known its seditious
object ; and that the evidence having thus been evenly balanced and equivocal, a reasonable
doubt arose as to the guilt of the accused, the benefit of which must be given to him ; (2)
that it was impossible to convict the accused under section 124A, Penal Code unless it was
found that he had an intention of • exciting disaffection, and that the evidence fell very far
short cf proving the intention. A declaration made under s. 4 of the Press Act, 1876. is
intended by the legislature to have certain effect, namely, that of fastening responsibility
for the conduct of the press on the person declaring in respect of matters wheio public
interests are involved. Therefore, when a book complained of as seditious or libellous is
printed iu a press, the Court performing the functions of a jury may presume that the owner
had a hand in the printing and was aware of the contents and character of the book. But
whether such a presumption is warranted in any individual case must depend upon its own
facts and circumstances. The presumption, however, is not conclusive, it is not one of
law but of fact, and it is open to the accused to rebut it.
Emperor v. Shankar Shrikrishna Dev, 35 Bom 55.
(2) Where an accused person convicted on a summary trial of an offence under s. 13
had removed his press, as to which he had made the declaration under s. 4, from the building,
in which it was originally kept, to another building and had not made a fresh declaration
mnder s, 5 as to the new premises, on the ground that no fresh declaration was necessary :
PRESS AND REGISTRATION OF BOOKS ACT. »3
that the offence was not triable summarily, and that where the new place of buisness
is within the same local jurisdictiou as the former place, a fresh declaration was unneces-
sary.
Bawa Narain Singh v. The Empress. P. R, 1889. Or. 9
5. No printed periodical work, containing public' news or comments
Rules as to publication of onjrablic news, shall be published in British
printed periodicals contain- India, except in conformity with the rules
ing public news. hereinafter laid down ;
(1) The printer and the publisher of every such periodical work shall
appear before the Magistrate within whose local jurisdiction such work
shall be published, and shall make and subscribe in duplicate the fol-
lowing declaration ;
"I, A. B. declare that I ana the printer, [or publisher, or printer and
publisher] of the peiiodical work entitled and printed [or published,
or printed and published, as the ca.se may be] at ,"
And the last blank in this form of declaration shall be filled up with a
true and precise account of the premises where the printing or publica-
tion is conducted.
(2) As often as the place of printing or publication is changed, a new
declaration shall be necessary :
(See note (2) to section 4.)
(3) As often as the printer or the publisher who shall have made
such declaration as is aforesaid shall leave British India, a new declara-
tion from a printer or publisher resident within the said territories shall
be necessary.
(1.) In the Kesarl case, 22 Bom., 112, Strachey, J., observed that " in the absence of
any evidence to the contrary, you will be justified in holding that the prisoner Tilak was
the publisher of every article and every word in the Kesat i."
(2.) The intention of the Act was to constitute the declarations made by a person that
he was the printer and publisher of a newspaper into prima facie evidence of publication and
to throw on the accused the burden of showing that the actual publisher of the libel was not
the person mentioned in the declaration. The presumption coul J. b j rebutted if such person
showed that he entrusted in good faith the temporary management of the newspaper to a
competent person dur.ng his absence, and that the libel was published without his authority,
knowledge or consent.
ftamusami V. Lokananda. 9 Mad 387.
6. Each of the two originals of every declaration so made and subscrib-
Authentication of declara- ed as is aforesaid, shall be authenticated by
the signature and official seal of the Magistrate
before whom the said declaration shall have been made.
One of the said originals shall be deposited among the records of the
Deposit office of the Magistrate, and the other shall bo
deposited among the records of the High Court
of Judicature, or [other principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction for
the place where] the said declaration shall have been made.
The officer in charge of each original shall allow any person to inspect
Inspection and supply of that original on payment of a fee of one rupee,
copies. and shall give to any person applying a copy of
the said declaration, attested by the seal of the Court which has the
custody of the original, on payment of a fee of two rupees,
4 TRESS AND REGISTRATION OF BOOKS ACT.
7. In any legal proceeding whatever, as well civil as orimina!, the
Office copy of declaration production of a copy of such declaration as is
to ibeprvmafadc evidence. aforesaid, attested by the seal of some Court
empowered by this Act to have the custody of such declarations, shall be
held (unless the contrary be proved) to be sufficient evidence, as against
the person whose name shall be subscribed to such declaration, that the said
person was printer or publisher, or printer and publisher (according as the
words of the said declaration may be) of every portion of every periodical
work whereof title shall correspond with the title of the periodical work
mentioned in the declaration.
(1) A declaration made under section 5 may be withdrawn under this section by means
of a fresh declaration. See also Emperor t>. Bhaskar (8 Bom. L. K. 421) Q.E,, v. Vinayek
(2, Bom. l>. R., 286) Snrendra Prasad Lahiri v. Emperor (138, Cal. 227), Joy Chandra Sarkar
v Emperor v, Rungpur Bartabaha) (138, Cal. 421), Emperor, v. Srikrishan Dey, (35
Bombay 59) and section 7 of Act VII of 1308.
(2) A person who subscribes the declaration must be presumed, under this section, to bo
cognisant of all that he was printing and publishing and, in the absence of any evidence to
the contrary, his liability in the matter cannot be gainsaid.
Apurba Krishna Bose, v, Emperor. 35 Cal, 141.
(3) This section makes the printer or publisher responsible for whatever may appear in
a newspaper, whoever the writer of the article may be and, therefore, a prosecution may
proceed against the printer, unless he can prove absence from the newspaper office in good
faith and 'without knowledge that the seditious articles would be published during his absence.
But it is not absence in good faith for a printer, to go away knowing very well what is going
to happen in his absence and for the purpose of shirking his liability,
Emperor v. Phanendra Nath Mitter, 35 Cal. 945.
(4.) The registered printer of a paper, so long as he continues such printer cannot escape
from criminal liability for publication therein, of a seditious article, by plea that he was
temporarily absent from the station when the article was printed, or that he was ignorant of
the contents thereof, or that he had no intention of committing any offence.
Ram Nath v. King Emperor. P. R. 1915, Cr. 1.
8. Provided always that any person who may have subscribed any
. ra Q such declaration as is aforesaid, and who may
wholfve s'gneTdeciaratbn subsequently cease to be the printer or publish-
and subsequently ceased to er of the periodical work mentioned in such
be printers or publishers. declaration, may appear before any Magistrate,
and make and subscribe in duplicate the following declaration :—
" /. A. B.t declare that I have ceased to be the printer [or publisher
or printer and publisher] of periodical work entitled - ."
Each original of the latter declaration shall be authenticated by
tu .- *• „„,! «ii;«, signature and seal of the Magistrate before
Authenhcationandl
been made, and one original of the said latter declaration shall be filed
along with each original of the former declaration.
The officer in charge of each original of the latter declaration shall
Inspection and supply of allow any person applying to inspect that
copies. original on payment of a fee of one rupee,
shall give to any person applying a copy of the said latter declaration,
attested by tbe seal of the Court having custody of the original, on
payment of a fee of two rupees.
In all trials in which a copy, attested as is aforesaid, of the former
Putting copy in evidence. declaration shall have been put in evidence, ifc
shall be lawful to put in evidence a copy
attested as is aforesaid, of the latter declaration, and the former
PRESS AND REGISTRATION OF BOOKS ACT. 5
Declaration shall not be taken to be evidence that the declarant was,
at any period subsequent to the date of the latter declaration, printer or
publisher of the periodical work therein mentioned.
PART III— DELIVERY OF BOOKS.
9. Printed or lithographed copies of the whole of every book which
shall be printed or lithographed in British
J2±B££±*I3±S India after this Act shall come into force, to-
to be delivered gratis to gether with all maps, prints or other engrav-
Government. ings belonging thereto, finished and coloured
in the same manner as the best copies of the same, shall, notwithstand-
ing any agreement (if the book be published) between the printer and
publisher thereof, be delivered by the printer at such place and to
such officer as the Local Government shall, by notification in the official
Gazette, from time to time direct, and free of expense to the Govern-
ment, as follows, that is to say : —
(a) in any case, within oue calendar month after the day on which
any such book shall first be delivered out of the press, one such
copy, and,
(6) if within one calendar year from such day the Local Govern-
ment shall require ;.the printer to deliver other such copies of
not exceeding two in number, then within one calendar
month after the day on which any such requisition shall be
made by the Local Government on the printer, another such
copy, or two other such copies, as the Local Government may
direct, the copies so delivered being bound, sewed or stitched
together aud upon the best paper on which any copies of the
book shall be printed or lithographed.
The publisher or other person employing the printer shall, at a
reasonable time before the expiration of the said month, supply him
witb all maps, prints and engravings finished and coloured as aforesaid,
which may be necessary to enable him to comply with the requirements
aforesaid.
Nothing in the former part af this section shall apply to —
(i) any second or subsequent edition of a book in which edition no
additions or alterations either iu the letter-press or in the maps, book-
prints or other engravings belonging to the book have been made, and
a copy of the first or some preceding edition of which book has been
delivered under this Act, or
(ii) any periodical work published in conformity with the rules laid
down in section 5 of this Act.
10. The officer to whom a copy of a book is delivered under the last
Receipt for copies delivered foregoing section shall give to the printer a
under section 9. receipt in writing therefor.
11. The copy delivered pursuant to clause (a) of the first paragraph
Disposal of copies delivered of section 9 of this Act shall be disposed of aa
under section 9. the Local Government shall from time to time
determine. Any copy or copies delivered pursuant to clause (b) of the
said paragraph shall be transmitted to the British Museum or the
Secretary of State for India or to the British Museum and the said
Secretary of State, as the case may be.
6 *RESS AND REGISTRATION OP BOOKS ACT.
PART VI— PENALTIES,
12. Whoever shall print or publish any book or paper otherwise
Penalty for printing con- than in conformity with the rule contained in
trary to rule in eection 3. ^ section 3 of this Act shall, on conviction before
a Magistrate, be punished by fine not exceeding five thousand rupees, or
•by simple imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or by
both.
13. Whoever shall keep in his possession any such press as aforesaid,
Penalty for keeping press without making such a declaration as is required
ffig^T^ by section 4 of this Act, shall, on conviction.
before a Magistrate, be punished by fine not
exceeding five thousand rupees, or by simple imprisonment for a term not
exceeding two years, or by both.
14. Any person who shall, in making any declaration under the
Punishment for making false authority of this Act, make a statement which
statement, is false, and which he either knows or believes
to be false or does not believe to be true, shall on conviction before a
Magistrate, be punished by fine not exceeding five thousand rupees, and
imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.
15. Whoever shall print or publish any such periodical work as is
hereinbefore described without conforming to
Penalty for printing or ihe rules hereinbefore laid down, or whoever
printed or published, any such periodical work,
knowing that the said rules have not been observed with respect to that
work, shall, on conviction before a Magistrate, be punished with fine not
exceeding five thousand rupees, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding
two years, or both.
16. If any printer of any such book as is referred to in section 9
of this Act shall neglect to deliver copies of the
Penalty for not delivering game pursuant to that section he shall for every
^hnlrpns UPPymgPn " such default forfeit to the Government such
sum not exceeding fifty rupees as a Magistrate
having jurisdiction in the place where the book was printed may, on the
application of the officer to whom the copies should have been delivered
or of any person authorized by that officer in this behalf, determine to be
in the circumstances a reasonable penalty for the default, and in addition
to such sum, such further sum as the Magistrate may determine to be the
value of the copies which the printer ought to have delivered.
If any publisher or other person employing any such printer shall
neglect to'supply him, in the manner (prescribed in the second paragraph
of section 9 of this Act, with the maps, prints, or engravings which tnay
be necessary to enable him to comply with the provisions of that section,
such publisher or other person shall for every such default forfeit to
the Government such sum not exceeding fifty rupees as such a
Magistrate as aforesaid may, on such an application as aforesaid,
determine to be in the circumstances a reasonable penalty for the default,
and, in addition to such sum, such further sum as the Magistrate may
determine to be the value of the maps, prints or engravings which
such publisher, or other person ought to have supplied.
PRESS AND REGISTRATION OF BOOKS ACT. 7
17. Any sum forfeited to the Government under the last foregoing-
beet ion may be recovered, under the warrant of
Recovery of forfeitures and the Magistrate determining the sum. or of his
disposal thereof and of fanes. ' • • «. *.T~ \i • -i i
successor in oince,. in tne manner authorised by
the Code of Criminal Procedure for the time being in force, and within,
the period prescribed by the Indian Penal Code, for the levy of a fine.
All fines or forfeitures under this Part of this Act shall, when,
recovered, be disposed of as the Local Government shall from time to-
time direct,
PART V. — REGISTRATION OF BOOKS.
18. There shall be kept at such office-, and by such officer as the-
Local Government shall appoint in this behalf,
Registration of memoranda ft book to be called ft Catalogue of Books printed
of books. • r» '.. • T T -i • i • i n i • f : t
in British India, wherein shall be registered a
memorandum of every book which shall have been delivered [pursuant
to clause (a) of the first paragraph of section &] of this Act. Such
memorandum shall (so far as may be practicable) contain the following
particulars (that is to say) : —
(1) the title of the book and the contents of the title-page, with,
a translation into English of such title and contents, when
the same are not in the English language :
(2) the language in which the book is written :
(8) the name of the author, translator or editor of the book or any
part thereof :
(4) the subject:
(5) the place of printing and the place of publication ;
(6) the name or firm of the printer and the name or firm of the
publisher :
f 7) the date of issue from the press or of the publication :
(B) the number of sheets, leaves or pages :
(9) the size :
(10) the first, second or other number of the edition :
(11; the number of copies of which the edition consists t
(12) whether the book is printed or lithographed :
(13) the price at which the book is sold to the public : and
(14) the name and residence of the proprietor of the copyright or
of any portion of such copyright.
Such memorandum shall be made and registered in the case of each
book as soon as practicable after the delivery of the [copy
thereof pursuant to clause (a) of the first paragraph or
section 9] .
[Effect of Registration] Repealed Act III oj 1914,
19. The memoranda registered during each quarter in the said Cata-
Pubiicatiou of memoranda logue shcill be published in the Local Gazette as
registered. soon as may be after the end of such quarter,
and a copy of the memoranda so published shall be sent to the said Sec-
retary of State, and to the Government of India, respectively.
8 DRAMATIC PERFCWRMANCES ACT,
PART VI.— MISCELLANEOUS.
20. The Local Government shall have power to make such rules as may
Power to make rules. be necessary or desirable for carrying out the
objects of thia Act, and from time to time to
repeal, alter and add to such rules.
All such rules and all repeals and alterations thereof, and additions
Publication, thereto, shall be published in the local Gazette.
21. The Governor General of India in Council may, by notification
Power to exclude any clasa ™ *}* Gazette of India, exclude any class of
of books from operation of books from the operation of the whole or any
Act. part or parts of this Act.
22. [Continuance of parts of Act] Rep. Act X of 1890, s. 7.
23. [Commencement.] Hep. Act XIV of 1870.
Statement of Objects and Reasons published with the Dramatic
Performances Bill.
The primary object of this Bill is to empower the Government to
prohibit Native plays which are scandalous, defamatory, seditious or
obscene. The necessity for some such measure has been established by
the recent performance in Calcutta of a scurrilous Bengali drama, to
prevent which the existing law was found to be insufficient.
The Bill, first empowers the Government or such officer as it empowers
in this behalf, to issue an order prohibiting any dramatic performance
which, in the opinion of the Government, comes within any of the
classes above mentioned. The order may be served on intending per-
formers or on the owner of the place in which the play takes place. The
order may also be notified by proclamation, and penalties are provided
for disobedience thereto.
Power is then given to the Magistrate to grant warrants to the Police
to enter, arrest and seize scenery, dresses &c.
Lastly, the Local Government is empowered to order, in specified
localities, that no play shall be performed in any place of public entertain-
ment, except under a license from Government and that a copy of the
piece, if written, or a sufficient account of its purport, if is be in panto-
mime, shall be previously furnished to the proper authorities.
Calcutta, 9th March 1876. (Sd.) A. HOBHOUSE.
DRAMATIC PERFORMANCES ACT, XIX OF 1876,
(AS AMENDED BY ACTS IV AND X OF 1914')
PASSED BY THIS OOVERNOB-UENERAL OK INDIA IN COUNCIL.
(Received the assent of the Governor-General on the 16th December 1876.)
An Act for the better control of public dramatic performances.
Whereas it is expedient to empower the Government to prohibit public
Preamble dramatic performances which are scandalous,
defamatory, seditious or obscene; It is hereby
enacted as follows :—
Short title, *• This Act may be called " The Dramatic
Performances Act, 1876 " :
DRAMATIC PERFORMANCES ACT. ,9
Local extent. It extends to the whole of British India.
2, In this Act " Magistrate " means in the Presidency Towns a
« Magistrate » defined. Magistrate of Police, and elsewhere the Magis-
trate of the District.
3. Whenever the Local Government is of opinion that any play-
Power to prohibit certain- pantomime, or other drama performed or about
to be performed in a public place is—
(a) of a scandalous or defamatory nature, or
(6) likely to excite feelings of disaffection to the Government estab-
lished by law in British India, or
(c) likely to deprave and corrupt persons present at the performance,
the Local Government, or outside the Presidency Towns and Rangoon
the Local Government or such Magistrate as it may empower in this be-
half, may by order prohibit the performance.
Explanation. — Any building or enclosure to which the public are
admitted to witness a performance on payment of money shall be deemed
a " public place " within the meaning of this section.
4. A copy of any such order may be served on any person about to-
Power to serv« order of take part in the performance so prohibited or
prohibition. on the owner or occupier of any bouse, room or
place in which such performance is intended to take place ; and any person
Penalty for disobeying order. ™ » h°m S«ch copy is served and who does or
willingly permits, any act inMisobedience to such
order shall be punished on conviction before a Magistrate with imprison-
ment for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine, or with
both.
5. Any such order may be notified by proclamation, and a written or
printed notice thereof may be stuck up at any
Power to notify order. foJ
of the order to the persons intending to take part in or to witness the
performance so prohibited.
Penalty for disobeying pro- 6. Whoever, after the notification of any
such order —
(a) takes part in the performance prohibited thereby, or in any
performance substantially the same as the performance so prohibited, or
(6) in any manner assists in conducting any such performance, or
(c) is in wilful disobedience to such order present as a spectator
during the whole or any part of any such performance, or
(d) being the owner or eccupier, or having the use of, any house, room
or place, opens, keeps or uses the same for any such performance, or
permits the same to be opened, kept or used for any such performance,
shall be punishable on conviction before a Magistrate with imprison-
ment for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine or with
both.
7- For the purpose of ascertaining the character of any intended public
Puwertocall for informa- dramatic performance, the Local Government
tion- or such officer as it may specially empower in
10 DRAMATIC PERFORMANCES ACT,
this behalf may apply to the author, proprietor or printer of the drama
about to be performed, or to the owner or occupier of the place in which
it is intended to be performed, for such information as the Local Govern-
ment or such officer thinks necessary.
Every person so applied to shall be bound to furnish the same to the
best of his ability, and whoever contravenes this section shall be deemed
to have committed an offence under section 176 of the Indian Penal Code.
8. If any Magistrate has reason to believe that any house, room or
Power to grant warrant to place is used, or is about to be used for any
Police to enter and arrest and performance prohibited under this Act, he may,
*eize- by his warrant, authorize any officer of police
to enter with such assistance as may be requisite, by night or by day, and
by force if necessary, any such house, room or place, and to take into*
custody all persons whom.he finds therein, and to seize all scenery, dresses
and other articles found therein and reasonably suspected to have been
used, or to be intended to be used, for the purpose of such performance.
Saving for prosecutions 9' No. conviction under this Act shall bar a-
under Penal Code, sections prosecution under section 124A or section 294«-
124A and 294. Of the Indian Penal Code.
10. Whenever it appears to the Local Government that the provisions
of this section are required in any local area, it
Power to prohibit dramatic may declare, by notification in the local official
performances in any local area Gazette, that such provisions are applied to such
except under license. ar£a frQm ft day t() be fixed ^ the notification<
On and after that day, the Local Government may order that no
dramatic performance shall take place in any place of public entertainment
within such area, except under a license to be granted by such Local
Government, or such officer as it may especially empower in this behalf.
The Local Government may also order that no dramatic performance-
shall take place in any place of public entertainment within such area
unless a copy of the piece, if and so far as it is written, or some sufficient
account of its purport, if and so far as it is in pantomime has been,
furnished, not less than three days before the performance, to the Local
Government, or to such officer as it may appoint in that behalf.
A copy of any order under this section may be served on any keeper of
a place of public entertainment, and if thereafter he does, or willingly
permits, any act in disobedience to such order, he shall be punishable on
conviction before a Magistrate with imprisonment for a term which may
extend to three months, or with fine, or with both.
11. The powers conferred by this Act on the Local Government may
Powers exerciseable by be exercised also by the Governor-General in
Governor General. Council.
Exclusion of performances ]2' Nothing in this Act applies to any
»t religious festivals. jatraa or performances of a like kind at religious
festiyals.
INDIAN PENAL CODE AMENDMENT ACT, 1898. 11
STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS.
The Indian Penal Code was enacted in 1860 under the powers con-
ferred by s. 43 of the Government of India Act, 1833 (3 and 4 Will. 4, c.
Reg. v. Elmstone (1878), 7 Bom. Or. Ca. at p. 100.
2. Since that date Parliament has bestowed on the Indian Legislature
various powers of legislating for extra-territorial offences, but no corres-
ponding amendment has been made in the Indian Penal Code. To a large,
but not to the full extent, those powers have been taken advantage of
by s. 8 of the Foreign Jurisdiction and Extradition Act, 1879 (XXI of
1879). It seems desirable that the Code itself should specify the extent
of its extra-territorial operation. At present this is done only in fragmentary
and misleading manner, and as something more than mere consolidation
is required, the present Bill has been prepared. It is proposed eventually
to consolidate the various enactments which have from time to time been
passed to amend the Code, but it is better to keep amendment distinct
from consolidation,
3. The English theory of territoriality of crime is purely a doctrine of
the common law and probably owes its origin to the old rules of criminal
pleading. It is not accepted by other nations — see Holl's International
Law, Ed. 3, p. 206, and the judgment of West, J., in Reg. v. Moogra
Chetty (1881), I, L. R. 5 Bom. at p. 362. Having regard to the circum-
stances of India, Parliament has departed from English rule, and has
authorised the Indian Legislature to deal in certain cases with extra-
territorial offences. It seems right that these powers should be exercised
to their full extent,, and the present Bill will effect that object. Even
then certain anomalies will remain, but they can be removed only by
further Parliamentary legislation.
NOTES ON CLAUSES.
Clause 8. — This clause proposes to repeal s. 4 of the Code and to
substitute a new section therefor.
Clause (1) of the new section follows the words of s. I. of the Indian
Councils Act, 1869 (32 and 33 Vic., c. 98) and corresponds with s. 8 (1)
of the Foreign Jurisdiction and 'Extradition Act, 1879, (XXI of 1879^,
Clause (2) follows the words of s. 1. of the Government of India Act,
1865 (28 and 29 Vic., c. 71), by using the term "British subject,"
and will extend the operation of s. 8 (2) of Act XXI of 1879, which
applies only to European British subjects. There are many British subjects
who are neither European British subjects as defined by the Act, nor
.Native Indian subjects, e.g. Cingalese, Tasmanians and inhabitants of the
Straits Settlements.
As regards clause (3), by s. 22 of the Indian Councils Act, 1861, (24t
and 25 Vic., c. 67), the Indian Legislature is empowered to legislate for
" all servants of the Government of India within the dominions of Princes
and States in alliance with Her Majesty." By s. 4. of the Indian Penal
Code the provisions of the Code are extended to every servant of the
Queen " within the dominions of any Prince or State in alliance with the
Queen, by virtue of any. treaty or engagement heretofore entered
It INDIAN PENAL CODE AMENDMENT ACT, 1898.
with the East India Company, or which may have been or may hereafter
be made in the name of the Queen by any Government of India." Neither
the Indian Act nor the English Statue draws any distinction between
Government servants who are British subjects and those who are not.
The words " whether a British subject or not, " have therefore been
inserted in the Bill to negative the decision in Empress v. Natwarai, (1891),
I. L. B. 16 Bom. 178, where it was held that a servant of Government
who was the subject of a Native State, could not be tried in British India
ior an offence committed outside. The necessary consequential amend-
ments will be made in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The expression " India " is defined by s. 3. (27) of Jthe General Clauses
Act, 1897) (X of 1897), and coincides with the definition given by the
Interpretation Act, 1889 (52 and 53 Viet, c. 63).
Clause 3.— This clause is intended to carry out a suggestion of the
Bombay Government consequent on a decision of the Bombay High Court
to the effect that a person in British India who instigated a Portuguese to
commit a murder in Goa, was guilty of no offence — see Queen Empress
v. Gnnpatrao (1894), I. L. K. 12 Bom. 105. Presumably, if the murderer
had been a Native Indian subject, the present law would have reached
him; but the point was not discussed. The Indian Legislature has
power to legislate for all persons in British India, and there is no reason
why British India, should be an Alsatia for the instigators of crime.
The 7tk October, 1897. M. D. CHALMERS.
The following report of the Select Committee on the Bill to amend
the Indian Penal Code in relation to Extra-territorial offences was
presented to the Council of the Governor-General of India for the purpose
of making Laws and Regulations on the 4th February 1898: —
We the undersigned, Members of the Select Committee to which the
Bill to amend the Indian Penal Code in relation to Extra-territorial
offences was referred, have considered the Bill with the further amend-
ments in the Penal Code given notice of at the meeting of Council held
on the 21st December, 1897. and the papers* noted in the list appended,
and have now the honour to submit this our Report, with the Bill as
amended by us annexed thereto.
& Clause 2 —We have altered Illustration (6) to this clause by
making it apply to a Native State in India. We think It is unsafe to
attempt to define the status of tribal territory in an illustration.
3. Clause 4. — We have carefully considered the new clause proposed
by the Government, and we have inserted it in the Bill with the following
tiTittti^fl «
(a) For the expression u the Government " we have substituted the
phrase " the Government established by law Jin British India."
This restores the language of the|Act 1870. 'Having regard to
the terms of section 17 of the Indian Penal Code, which
defines " Government " the omission of the words " established
by law in British India " might be held to give an extended
meaning to the term " Government, " whereas it ought to have
exactly the same meaning aa in the A$t of 1870.
• Not printed.
INDIAN PENAL CODE AMENDMENT ACT, 1898. 13
(5) We have altered the term of imprisonment from ten years to
three, thus restoring the law of 1870. The term of ten years is
provided as an alternative for transportation in sections
121A, and 122 ; but apparently the framers of the Act of
1870, in section 124 A, wished to draw a marked distinction
between minor offences and offences of a very serious character
where transportation would be the only appropriate punish-
ment,
(c) We have omitted the words " or promotes or attempts to promote
feelings of enmity or ill-will between different classes of Her
Magisty's subjects " and have framed a new clause to deal
with the offence thereby indicated. It appears to us that the
offence of stirring up class hatred differs in many important
respects from the offence of sedition against the State. It comes
more appropriately in the Chapter relating to offences against
the public tranquillity. The offence only affects the Government
or the State indirectly, and the essence of the offence is that
it predisposes classes of the people to action which may disturb
the public tranquillity. The tact that this offence is punishable in
England as seditious libel is probably due to historical causes,
and has nothing to do with logical arrangements.
(d) We have omitted the words " or ill-will " at the conclusion of
explanation 1. The expression " all feelings of ill-will "
appears to us to be too wide and vague. It is only when feel-
ings of ill-will amount to disloyalty or enmity that they
constitute such disaffection as is contemplated by the clause.
A certain amount of ill-will may be compatible with genuine
loyalty.
(e) We have added explanation 3 to make it clear that criticism on
the action of Government is not confined to cases in which it is
sought to bring about an alteration of what has been done. For
example, suppose the Government make an appointment
which is considered objectionable. That appointment may be
criticised, although the criticism may not have in view the
cancellation of the appointment. We have made consequential
amendments in explanation 2 to make the language of the
explanations uniform.
4. Clause 5. — The object of framing this clause has already been
detailed. In framing it we have altered the words " enmity or ill-will "
into " enmity or hatred," and we have fixed the maximum punishment at
two years' imprisonment.
We recommended that the clause when passed should be included in
section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, so that offences under it
should only be prosecuted under the authority or with the sanction of the
Government.
5. Clause 6. — We have inserted the clause proposed by the Govern-
ment, but we have altered and enlarged the scope of the exception to the
clause. No doubt the statements, rumours and reports referred to are of
14 INDIAN PENAL CODE AMENDMENT ACT, 189&.
a highly mischievous character, but, having regard to the conditions under
which modern journalism and the discussion of public questions are
necessarily carried on, we thiuk that, when the statement, rumour or
report is published without any criminal intent, it is going too far to
require the person who published it to prove its actual truth. To
require such proof might be throwing an impossible burden upon him,
and it should be sufficient for him to show that he had reasonable grounds
for believing it, as, for instance, by showing that he made due inquiry
before he published it.
» * » «
7. We do not think that either the original, provisions of the Bill as
introduced or the further amendments in the Penal Code above referred
to have been so altered as to require republication, and we recommend that
the Bill be passed as now amended,
D. M. Chalmers, R. M, Rivaz, C. C. Stevens, H, E. M. James, P.
Ananda Charlu, * G. H. P. Evans, t Lakshmishwar Singh. J
The 31st January 1898,
• I sign subject to the objections embodied in my minute of dissent,
f I think the words " tending to the disturbance of public tranquillity " or words to
that effect might be advantageously inserted in section 153 A.
£ Note of dissent appended.
So far as I know, there never has been any serious doubt expressed as
to the true meaning of section 1 24 A new in the Penal Code. No difficulty
could arise except upou the view that the explanation attached to the sec-
tion cannot be read along with it as virtually defining the term " disaffec-
tion ". It has thus become urgent to remove the difficulty interposed by
that view. This is best met by throwing the substance of the explanation
into the form of a definition as follows : —
" Feelings of disafiection mean all feelings incompatible with a disposi-
tion to render obedience to the lawful authority of the Government
established by law in British India and to support the lawfnl authority
thereof against unlawful attempts to subvert or resist that authority."
This, which has come from the Defence Association, I suggested in the
Committee and the majority were against me. By adding to such a
definition proviso such as Mr Stephen has made part of his section 1O2 in
his " Draft Code, " the law will, in my judgment be elucidated far better
than by the proposed explanation, which I am for omitting as a necessary
consequence.
The proposed words " hatred, contempt and enmity " are, in my opinion,
the very worst that could be chosen. Standing by themselves, they are, in
the last degree, vague, misleading and obscure. By giving room for no
small amount of fanciful speculation, they cannot fail to prove most hurtful
to public interests by spreading a sense of uncertainty and virtually stifling
all frank discussion of public questions. I would therefore score out,
from the clause now proposed, the words " to bring or attempt to bring
into hatred or.contempt or." I may also piont out that the definition I
have recommended would be wide enough to cover all forms of real
political hatred, which should be penalised. I very much doubt whether
what is proposed in the Bill as contained in these objected words is good
or sound law at the present day,
INDIAN PENAL CODE AMENDMENT ACT, 1898. 15
I am for eliminating the penalty of transportation from the section,
A study of the history of this section shews how it is a mistake in the
section and how the Law Commissioners, who sat on the Original Draft/
Penal Code, criticised it in strong terms. The danger of retaining it has
been already once exemplified, and may foe, any day, exemplified again
and again. The danger lies in its being viewed — as it is too sure to be
by not a few — as the maximum, permissible in all cases except where
extenuating circumstances or other grounds for leniency exist.
I am opposed to the proposed clause 158 A, as a dangerous piece of
legislation and as being impolitic (among other reasons) by neces-
sitating Government to side with, or to appear to side with, one
party as against another. In my humble judgment it will only
accentuate the evil which it is meant to remove. Far from healing
the differences which still linger, or which now and then come to the
surface, it would widen the gap by encouraging insidious men to do
mischief in stealth, with the sure hope that the Government would
come down on such as openly resented. It would have all the repressive
effects which the proposed amendments on 124 A cannot fail to have,,
much to the detriment of undoubted rights and useful work.
In clause 505, as proposed to be altered, I would omit the words
<c or which is likely to cause " from each of (a), (b) and (c)vand substitute-
the words " and thereby to induce any person" for the words " whereby
any person may be induced" in (6). Intent being in this> as in 124A7
the essence of the offence, the words which I have objected to must of
necessity introduce a world of confusion which might be easily illustrated.
They are bound to operate prejudicially to public good. It is perhaps
necessary to add, with reference to clause 153A and the changes in 505.
that, whereas the prior sanction af Government which is prescribed will
be something of a guarantee, it will mostly depend on the strength with
which the case is urged by the District officer ; for I hear that, in the
face of a strong representation by the latter, the Government would,
naturally and perhaps not improperly, hesitate to take upon itself the
responsibility of withholding sanction. The mischief of these sections lies
not so much in the natural results which will follow, as in tbe unnatural
and exaggerated dread they would undesirably inspire in most cases. In
such a result the balance of advantage will not be on the side of the public.
The Shi January P. ANANDA CHAELU.
I sign the report subject to the following observations : —
1. I think that, in accordance with the opinion of the majority of the
Judges of the Calcutta High Court, it should be clearly stated in section
124 A thattho intention to produce the effect mentioned therein is the
basis of the offence. A similar alteration should be made in explanation
2, and after the words " by lawful means " the words " or for the purpose
merely of showing that they are erroneous but " should be inserted, and
after the word " without " the words " the intention of " should be
added. As the High Court has pointed out, comments made for such
a purpose and without the intention of exciting hatred or disaffection are
legitimate and allowable. Criminal intent is the essence of the law of
sedition as it prevails in England. It should be made quite clear thab
in all prosecutions under sections 124A, 153 A and 505, the onus shall
16 INDIAN PENAL CODE AMENDMENT ACT, 1898.
lie on the prosecution to prove the intention in the mind of the accused
at the time, or at all events to adduce such evidence as to enable the-
Court reasonably to infer the same from his acts. In this as in all
other penal cases the accused is entitled to demand that his guilt shall be
fully proved against him by the prosecution beyond all reasonable doubt.
I submit that this class of prosecutions should not be exceptionally dealt
with, but that they should be called upon to discharge the duties which
ordinarily belong to all prosecutions in criminal cases, viz., that the
burden of proving the offence lies on them.
2. Having regard to the language of explanation 1 and to recent
judicial rulings on the meaning of " disaffection " it seems to me that the
words " brings or attempt* to bring into hatred or contempt or " are super-
fluous and may lead to unnecessary difficulties. As regards " hatred "
I must confess that I am no better able than is Worcester's Dictionary
to distinguish between the meaning of that word and tf enmity/' the term
which is employed in explanation 1. As regards u contempt " the idea
conveyed by that word seems to be fully covered by the rest of the section,
unless indeed it is desired to give so dangerous an extension to the scope
of the section as will enable Government to prosecute to a conviction
persons responsible for those cartoons, skits or other comic productions
with which newspapers and other periodicals not infrequently try to
enliven their readers.
3. I think further that the definition of " disaffection " in explanation
1 to section 124 A is far too vague, and would recommend the adoption
in its place of some such definition as that suggested by the European
and Anglo-Indian Defence Association. I quote it here for the sake of
convenience: — "Feelings of disaffection means all feelings incompatible
with a disposition to render obedience to the lawful authority of the
Government established by law in British India and to support the lawful
authority thereof against unlawful attempts to subvert or resist that
authority."
4. The remarks I have made in paragraph 1 with regard to the im-
portance of making the intention the basis of the offence contemplated
by section 124 A apply equally to the offence contemplated by the
new section 153 A. It should be clearly stated in the section that
mens rea is an essential ingredient of the offence under section 153A.
5. Both sections 153 A and gection 505 when passed should be included
in section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, so that offenders under
them should be prosecuted only under the authority and with the sanction
of the Local Government.
6. There is one more point with regard to section 124- A which has,
I think, been overlooked and which to my mind is of great importance,
The section as it stands is far too comprehensive. It appears to me that
some attempt should be made to restrict the discretion of Judges in in-
flicting punishment. For instance, under the proposed section it is quite
possible to punish a journalist or a public speaker who is only guilty of
usijng indiscreet language calculated at most to give rise to trifling feelings
of irritation. Surely such action on the part of the journalist or the
public speaker ought not to be considered as a penal offence. I think
there should be some differentiation between the punishment allotted for
acts like those mentioned above and for intentional acts of sedition.
Slst January, 1898, LAKSHMISHWAR SINGH.
INDIAN PENAL CODE AMENDMENT ACT, I898L 27
ACT NO. IV OF 1898.
An Act to amend the Indian Penal Code-
PASSED BY THE GOVERNOR GENERAL OF INDIA IN COUNCIL*
(I8th February, 1898).
Whereas it is expedient to amend the Indian Penal Code ; It is
hereby enacted as follows : —
1. (1) This Act may be called the Indian Penal Code Amendment Act,
Short title and commence- 1898 ; and
ment,
(2) It shall come into force at once,
2. Section 4 of the Indian Penal Code is hereby repealed, and the
Substitution of new section following section is substituted therefor,
for section 4, Act XLV, 1860. namely : — •
" 4. The provisions of this Code apply alsa to any offence committed
Extension of Code to extra- by-
territorial offences.
(1) any Native Indian subject of Her Majesty in any place without and
beyond British India ;
(2) any other British subject within the territories of any Native Prince
or Chief in India ;
(3) any servant of the Queen, whether a British subject or not, within
the territories of any Native Prince or Chief in India.
Explanation. — In this section the word ' offence ' includes every act
committed outside British India which, if committed in British India,
would be punishable under this Code.
Illustrations.
(a) A, a coolie, who is a Native Indian subject, commits a murder in Uganda. He can
be tried and convicted of murder in any place in British India in which he may be found.
(6) B, a European British subject, commits a murder in Kashmir. He can be tried
and convicted of murder in any place in British India in which he may be found,
(c) C, a foreigner who is in the service of the Punjab Government, commits a murder in
Jiud. He can be tried and convicted of murder at any place in British India in which he
may be found.
(d) D, a British subject living in Iiidore, instigates E to commit a murder in Bombay.
Disguilty of abettin g murder.
Insertion of new section 3- After section 108 of the Indian Penal Code
after section 108, Act XLV, the following section shall be added, namely : —
I860,
" 108-A. A person abets an offence within the meaning of this Code who,
Abetment in British India in British India, abets the commission of any
of offences outside it. act without and beyond British India which
would constitute an offence if committed in British India.
Illustration.
A, in British India, instigates B, a foreigner in Goa, to commit a murder in Goa. A is
guilty of abetting murder,
Substitution of new section . , 4- Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code
for section 124-A. Act XLV, is hereby repealed, and the following section
I860, is substituted therefor, namely :—
" 124-A. Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or
Sedition ^Y visible representation, or otherwise, brings
or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or
excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards Her Majesty or the
18 INDIAN PENAL CODE AMENDMENT A€T, 1898.
Government established by law in British India, shall be punished with
transportation for life or any shorter term, to which fine may be added,
or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine
may be added, or with fine.
Explanation 1. — The expression 'disaffection' includes disloyalty and
all feelings of enmity.
Explanation 2. — Comments expressing disapprobation of the measures
of the Government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means,
without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection,
do not constitute an offence under this section.
Explanation 3. — Comments expressing disapprobation of the adminis-
trative or other action of the Government without exciting, or attempting
to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection do not constitute an offence
under this section. "
Addition of new section , 5- After section 153 of the Indian Penal
after section 153, Act XLV, Code the following section shall be inserted,
i860. namely : —
" 153- A. Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or
Promoting enmity between by visible representations, or otherwise, promotes
classes, or attempts to promote feelings of enmity or
hatred between different classes of Her Majesty's subjects shall be punished
with imprisonment which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with
both.
Explanation. — It does not amount to an offence within the meaning
of this section to point out, without malicious intention and with an honest
view to their removal, matters which are producing, or have a tendency
to produce, feelings of enmity or haired between different classes of Her
Majesty's subjects."
6. Section 505 of the Indian Penal Code is hereby repealed and
Substitution of new section the following section is substituted therefor,
for section 505, Act XLV, namely '— —
1860.
statements conducing to " 505. Whoever makes, publishes or circulates
public mischief, any statement, rumour or report. —
(a) with intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, any officer,
soldier or sailor in the army or navy of Her Majesty or in the
Royal Indian Marine or in the Imperial Service Troops to mutiny
or otherwise disregard or fail in his duty as such ; or
(6) with intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm
to the public, or to any section of the public whereby any
person may be induced to commit an offence against the State
or against the public tranquillity ; or
(c) with intent to incite, or which is likely to incite, any class or
community of persons to commit any offence against any other
class or community ;
shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to two years, or
with fine, or with both.
Exception.— -It does not amount to an offence, within the meaning of
this section, when the person making, publishing or circulating any such
statement, rumour or report has reasonable grounds for believing that
such statement, rumour or report is true and makes, publishes or circulates
it without any such intent as aforesaid.
EXTRACTS FROM SCHEDULE II., (TABULAR STATEMENT OF OFFENCES)
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1898.
Whether
Whether
a warrant
Section.
Ofience,
the
police
may
arrest
without
warrant
or a sum-
mons
shall
ordinarily
issue in
the first
Whether
bailable
or not.
Whether
compound-
able or
not.
Punishment
under the
Indian
Penal
Code.
By what
Court
triable.
or not.
instance,
121-A
Conspiri n g
Shall not
Warrant.
Not
Not com-
Transporta-
Court of
to commit
arrest
bailable.
pound-
tion for
Session.
certain
without
able.
life or any
o fl e ii c e s
warrant.
shorter
against the
term, or
State.
imprison-
ment of
either des-
cription
for ten
years.
124-A
Sedition ...
Do,
Do.
Do.
Do.
Transporta-
Court of
tion for life
Sessions
or for any
Chief Pre-
term, or
s i d ency
impr i s o n-
Magistrate
ment of
or District
either des-
Magistrate
cription for
or Magis-
3 years and
trate of the
fine, or fine.
first class
specially
empowered
by the local
Government
in that be-
half.
I53-A
Promoting
enmity be-
Do.
Do.
Do.
Do.
Imp r i s o n-
ment of
Presidency
Magistrate
tween class-
either des-
or Magis-
es.
cription for
trate of the
2 years or
first class.
fine, or
both.
CASES OF SEDITION.
(1) Queen Empress V. Joaendra Chandra Bose (generally known as the Bangabasi case)
was instituted in 1891, and is reported in 19 Cal. 35. " Disaffection " and " disapprobation "
explained and s. 124 A referred to and explained to the Jury. The Jury were unable to
return a unanimous verdict. They were discharged and a retrial was ordered. In the
meantime the accused having tendered an apology, the case was dropped.
(2) The accused, who was the editor, proprietor, and publisher of the Kesari newspaper,
was charged under section 124-A of the Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860) with exciting and at-
tempting to excite feelings of disaffection to Government by the publication of certain articles,
etc., in the Kesari in its issue of the 15th June, 1887. At the trial an order for the
20 CASES OF SEDITION.
prostcutwn by Government under Section 196 of theCriminal Procedure Code (Act Xof 1882)
In the following form, dated July 26th, 1897, was tendered in evidence.
11 Under the provisions of Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Mirza Abas All
Baie, Oriental Translator to Government, is hereby ordered by His Excellency the Governor
in Council to make a complaint against Mr. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, B.A., L.L.B., of Poor.a,
publisher, proprietor and editor of the Kesari, a weekly vernacular newspaper of Poona, and
against Mr. Hari Narayan Gokhale, of Poona, printer of the said newspaper, in respect of
certain articles appearing in the said newspaper, under Section 124-A of the Indian Penal
Code and any other section of the said Code which may be found to be applicable to the
case."
Counsel for the accused objected that the order was too vague and should have
specified the articles with reference to which the accused was to be charged. Held that the
order was sufficient and was admissible, but that if it were not sufficient, the commitment
might be accepted and the trial proceeded with under section 532 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. Queen-Empress v. Morton (1) followed. In order to show the intention of such
publications, counsel for the prosecution tendered in evidence certain letter signed
fi Ganesh " which appeared in the issue oi Kesari of May 4, 1897. Objection was taken
that it was not admissible, inasmuch as letters to newspapers often express opinions which
are not the opinions of the editor and publisher. Held that the letter was admissible to
show intention and animus. The proceedings in the Legislative Council which resulted in the
passing of an Act cannot be referred to as aids to the construction of that Act. Administra-
tor General of Bengal v. Premlal Mullick followed.
Section 124-A of the Penal Code (Act XLV of 1360) explained. Meaning of the word
" disaffection. " At the close of the Judge's charge to the Jury, Counsel for the first
accused asked that the following points might be reserved for the decision of the Court
under Section 434 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Act X of 1882), viz.—
Whether the order for the prosecution was sufficient under Section 196 of the
Criminal Procedure Code. 2. Whether the High Court had power, in the absence of a sufficient
order, to accept the commitment of the accused under Section 532 of the Criminal
Procedure Code and to proceed with the trial. 3. Whether the meaning given to the term
" disaffection " by the Judge in his charge to the Jury WAS correct. The Judge declined to
reserve the above points. The first accused having been convicted applied to (a Full
Bench under clause 41 of the Amended Letters Patent, 1865, for a certificate that the
«ase was a a fit one for appeal to the Privy Council. The points upon which he desired to
appeal were those which his counsel at the close of the trial asked the Judge to reserve as
above stated. The Full Bench refused to grant the certificate.
Queen Enipreaa v. Bal Gangadh&r Tilak. (Kesari Case.) 22 Bom. 112.
T3) The word " disaffection " in section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860)
is used in a special sense as meaning political alienation or discontent, a spirit of disloyalty to
the Government or existing authority. An attempt to excite feelings of disaffection to the
Government is equivalent to an attempt to produce political hatred of Government as estab-
lished by law, to excite political discontent, and alienate the people from their allegiance. This
meaning of the word " disaffection " in the main portion of the section is not varied by the
explanation. Per Parsons, J. :— The word " disaffection " used in Section 124-A of the Indian
Penal Code cannot be construed as meaning an absence of or the contrary of affection or love,
that is to say, dislike or hatred, but is used in its special sense as signifying political alienation
or discontent, that is to say, feeling of disloyalty to the existing Government, which tends to a
disposition not to obey, but to resist and subvert the Government. Per Ranade, J. : —
" Disaffection " is act a mere absence or negation of love or good-will, but a positive feeling
of aversion which is akin to disloyalty, a defiant insubordination of authority, or when it is
not defiant, it secretly seeks to alienate the people and weaken the bond of allegiance and
prepossesses the minds of the people with avowed or secret animosity to Government, — a
feeling which tends to bring the Government into hatred or contempt by imputing base and
corrupt motives to it, and makes them indisposed to obey or support the laws of the realm,
and which promotes discontent and public disorder.
Queen Empress v. Ram Chandra Narayan and another (Pratod case). 22 Bombay, 152.
(4) Meaning of the term "disaffection" explained. Any one who, by any of the
means referred to in section 124-A. of the Indian Penal Code excites or attempts to excite
feelings of hatred, dislike, ill-will, enmity, or hostility towards the Government
established by law in British India, excites or attempts to excite, as the case may be,
feelings of "disaffection" as that term is used in section 124-A. Such feelings are
necessarily inconsistent with, and incompatible with a disposition to render obedience to the
lawful authority of Government and to support the Government against unlawful attempts to
subvert or resist it The term " disaffection " may be taken as synonymous with " disloyalty."
The ordinary meaning of the term "disaffection " as used in section 124-A is not varied by the
explanation appended to that section. When a person is charged with having committed the
CASES OF SEDITION.
•offence punishable under section 124A of the Penal Code, his intention may be inferred from
«me particular speech, article, or letter, or from that speech, article or letter, considered in
conjunction with what such person h»s said, written or published on another or other
occasions. Where it is ascertained that the intention of such person was to excite feelings of
disaffection to the Government established by law in British India, it is immaterial whether
or not the words spoken, written or published could have the effect of exciting such feelings
of disaffection, and it is immaterial whether the words were true or were false, and, except on
the question of punishment, or in a case in which the speaker, writer, or publisher is charged
with having excited such feelings of disaffection, it is immaterial whether or not the words
in fact excite such feelings of disaffection.
Queen Empress v. Aniba Parshad. 20 All. 65.
(5) Orders under section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code should be expressed
•with sufficient particularity and with strict adherence to the language of the
section. But the real question in such cases is whether the prosecution was instituted
under the authority of Government. An order purported to accord sanction to
prosecute the editor, manager and the printer of a newspaper under section 124- A of the
Indian Penal Code without specifying their names, and containing a misdescription of the
seditious article. A police officer received it from the Commissioner of Police, and under
his directions applied for and obtained warrants from the Chief Presidency Magistrate
against the accused. He was examined by the Magistrate, but not on oath, and his
deposition was not recorded. On the day of the trial the same police officer filed an amend-
ed order under section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code correcting the error in the name
of the article in the previous orders. Held (I) that the prosecution was regularly instituted.
Queen-Empress V. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, L L. R. %2 Bombay 112, referred to. Kali Kinkur
Sett v. Nriiya Oopal Roy, I. L. R, S'l Calcutta 469, and Reg, v. Judd, 37 W. R. I43t
_1 • J_* __ * 1 J tl'\ 'I'l J. J_l J J ^^4.1 ^*, 1 fl£ **.£ 4-V» **. O «.! «~ - „ ~ 1 T> 1 ^i _ -1 _
respect of an offence under section 121-A of the Indian renal Code, coupled
allegations, though not made on oath nor recorded, amounted to a '* complaint. *' Queen-
impress v. Sham Lall, I L R, 14 Calcutta 707. followed, (iii) That the presumption
under section 114 of the Evidence Act supplied any omissions either as to the method of
the communication of the order to the prosecuting officer, or in the order sheet of the
Magistrate, (iv) The article in question was incompatible with the continuance of the
Government established by law and was seditious. It is the duty of every citizen to
support the Government established by law and to express with moderation any dis-
approbation he may feel of its acts and measures, (v) That the republication of seditious
articles from another newspaper, one of which only was filed as an exhibit by the
prosecution and used and the case against the editor of that paper on his trial for sedition,
was not a report of the proceedings of a Court of Justice, and was not justifiable under the
circumstances. (vi) That the presumption contained in section 7 of Act XXV of 1867, in
the absence of evidence to the contrary, rendered the printer liable for seditious matters
published in his paper.
Apurba Krishna Bose v. Emperor (19J7). 35 Gal 141.
(6) Laxman who was sub-editor of the Gurakhi newspaper published in Bombay was
unanimously found guilty by the Jury under and section 124 A and sentenced to six months
simple imprisonment. Vinayek who was the proprietor, editor, printer and publisher was
found guilty by the Jury and was sentenced to twelve months simple imprisonment. (1899)
Queen Empress v. Laxman, and Queen Empress v. Viuayek (Gurakhi case.)
Reported in 2. Bo. L. E., 286.
(7) Bhaskar who was Editor and publisher of a Marathi Newspaper called Mala was
fouud guilty by the Jury and sentenced to six months simple imprisonment and a fine of
one thousand rupees.
Emperor v. Bhaskar. Reported in 8 Bo. L. R, 421.
(8) The words u which has been used for the commission of any offence " refer to
cases of the same nature i.e., to instruments like guns or swords produced in Conrt.
A panting press cannot be said to have been used for the commission of sedition
inasmuch as the offence consists in the publication and not the printing, the press being
only a remote instrument.
Abinas Chandra Bhattacharjee v. Emperor (1907). (Yugantar case,) 34 Cal. 986.
(9) The second Tilak trial took place in 1908. Bal Gangadhar Tilak was charged with
having published in his newspaper Kesari a series of articles, he was tried in the Bombay
High Court, was found guilty and sentenced to transportation for six years and a fine of
Rs. 1,000.
Emperor v. Bal Gangadhar Tilak. Reported in 10 Bom. L. R. 848.
The accused :was charged with an offence punishable under s. 124 A of the Indian Penal
Code in respect of an, article which he published in his newspaper (Kesari) and also with
22 CASES OF SEDITION.
offences punishable under "Sections 124 A and 153 A of the Code with regard to another
article which he published in the same newspaper. For all these offences he was tried at
one trial, and was convicted and aeate»ced for «ach of them. Held that there was no
irregularity on the ground of misjoiixier of charges. Sections 234, 235, 236 and 239 of the
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, mentioned as exceptions in section 233 of the Code, are
not mutually exclusive. If it had been intended that s. 235 (2) or s. 236 should not be
made use of in co-operation with s, 234 this intention could have been easily expressed.
If the exceptions are matually exclusive, the provisions of s. 23G or 237 could never be
invoked to prevent a miscarriage of justice arising from a failure to make good all the
details of a charge joined .with two other charges under s. 234, The Legislature cou'd hardly
have intended that a joint trial of three offences «nHer s. 234 of the Criminal Procedure
Code, 1898, should prevent the prosecution from establishing at the same trial the minor and
alternative degrees of criminality involved in the act complained of. Sections 235 (2) and
236 of the Criminal Procedure, 1898, may be resorted to in framing additional charges where
the trial is of three offences of the same kind committed within the year. Before granting
a certificate for leave to appeal to the Privy Council, the Court must be satisfied that the re
is reasonable ground for thinking that grave and substantial injustice may have been done
by reason of some departure from the principles of natural justice,
In re Bal Gangadhar Tilak. 33 Bom. 221.
(10) In the same year (1908) the case of Leakat Hossain Khan and Abdul Gaffur v.
Emperor came up on appeal before the High Court, The appellants were convicted by the
Sessions Judge of Backergunge of sedition and abetment of sedition and sentenced, respectively,
to three years rigorous imDrisonmenb. It was held by the High Court that no distinct offence
had been established under Section 153 A and the convictions under that section were set
aside while those under Section 124 A, were affirmed.
App, No, 214 of 1908,
(11) A reasonable criticism of the action of Government in a particular matter without
any attempt to create hatred or contempt against it is not sedition, but an incitement to
insurrection falls within the scope of s. 124- A. of the Penal Code. Seditious articles
published in the same newspaper, not forming the subject of the charges, on which the
prisoner is being tried at the time, are admissible to show the intention of the person, who
printed or published the latter. S, 7 of Act XXV of 1867 makes the printer or publisher
responsible for everything appearing in the newspaper, whoever the author of the
seditious articles may be, unless he can prove absence from the office of the paper in good
faith and without knowledge that during his absence seditious matter would be
published. It is not absence in good faith for the printer to go away, but with the full
knowledge of what is going to happen in his absence and for the purpose of shirking his
liability. Queen Empress v. Bed Oangdhar Tilak, I. L. R. 22 Bombay 112. dissented from.
Ramasami V. Lokunada /. L. J?. 9 Madraz 387, approved of. 35 Cal 945-
Emperor v. Phanendra Nath Mitter (1908)
(12) The accused Ganesh BaJwant Modak was the manager of a newspaper selling agency
called the Vartman Agency. This agency was the sole agent for sale in India of a fort-
nightly periodical styled " Swaraj :> which was printed and published in London. One of
the issues of the periodical contained an article entitled "the Aetiology of the Bomb in
Bengal " which was charged as sedition within the meaning of section 124- A of the Indian
Penal Code. It appeared that the accused received by post an advance copy of the issue of
the periodical in question. He advertised the same and also reviewed it in a daily newspaper
called the JRasktra Mat, which was published under his management The sale copies of the
issue were later! on received by him by a steamer parcel and all of them were sold by the
Vartman Agency. The accused was under these circumstances charged with having published
the seditious article in India, an offence punishable under section 124-A of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860. He was convicted of the offence and sentenced to suffer one month's simple
imprisonment. The accused applied to the High Court. It is the settled practice of the
High Court of Bombay to refuse to interfere, in the exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, in
regard to findings of fact, except on very exceptional grounds such as misstatement of
evidence by the lower Court, or by the placing by that Court of onus of proof on the
accused contrary to the law of evidence. Under the Indian Penal Code, (XLv of 1860) all
that is necessary to constitute an attempt to commit an offence is some external act,
something tangible and ostensible of which the law can take hold as an act showing
progress towards the actual commission of the offence. It does not matter that the
progress was interrupted. An attempt to publish sedition is complete as soon as the
accused knowingly sells a copy containing the seditious article. It is none the less an
attempt because 'something external to himself happens which prevents the perusal of the
articles by the buyers or any other member of the public. The conviction and sentence
confirmed.
Emperor v Ganesh Balwant Modak. /The Swaraj caaej 34 Bom. 378.
CASES OF SEDITION. 2£
(13) The accused published a book containing 18 poems of which four were the snbject
matter of the charge. The general trend of the poems charged, as well as the remaining ones
in the book, evinced a spirit of bloodthirstiness and murderous eagerness directed against
Government, conveyed the urgency of taking- up> the sword, and made an appeal of blood
thirsty incitement to the people to* take up the sword, form secret societies and adopt
guerilla warfare for the purpose of rooting out the British rule. HeM that the accused com-
mitted the offence of abetting the waging of war (section 121 of the Indian Penal Code)
by the publication of the poems charged. Held, further that the Court was entitled to look
into the poema other those forming the subject-matter of the charge, for the purpose of
finding out the intention of the writer and the design of the publications. Per Chandavarkar
J. ;— Under the Indian Penal Code, the waging or levying of war and the abetting of it are
put upon the same footing by section 121 : that is, the abetting of the waging of war is
under the Code as much an offence of treason as the waging of war itself. The word
" abetment " is defined in section 107 of of the Code and one of its meanings, as given in
there, is " instigating any person to da anything/ This meaning is not excluded by
anything that occurs in section 121. The general law is laid down in sections 107 — 120 of
the Code. According to it, " to constitute' the offenee of abetment it is not necessary that
the act abetted should be committed, or that the effect requisite to constitute the offence
should be caused. " This applies to the abetment of the waging of war against the King as
much as to the abetment of any other offence under the Code. The only difference created
between the former offence and other offences is that, while under the general law as to
abetment a distinction is made for the purpose of punishment between abetment which has
succeeded and abetment which has failed,, section 121 does away with that distinction so- far
as the offence of waging war is concerned, and deals equally with an abettor whose insti-
gation has led to war and one whose instigation has taken no effect whatever ; and that for
this simple reason that such a crime more than any other must be sharply and severely
dealt with at its first appearance and nipped in the bud with a strong hand. Per Heaton
J, Under section 107 of the Indian Penal Code there may be instigation of an unknown
person. The word "abet '* as used in section 12! of the Code, lias the same meaning as is
given to it by section 107. The " abetment " meant by section. 121 is not necessarily confined
to abetment of some war in progress. There may be, and usually, is> instigation of rebellion
before rebellion actually begins; that kind of instigation is under the Code abetting waging;
war against the King, So long as a man only tries to inflame feeling, to excite a state of
mind, he is not guilty of anything more than sedition. It is only when he definiteljT and
clearly incites to action that he is guilty of instigating and therefore abetting, the waging of
war.
Emperor v Ganesh Damodar Savarkar. 34 Bom. 394.
(14) The accused was the printer and publisher of Karmyocfin newspaper which published
an article entitled <v To my Countrymen " purporting to be written by one Arabinda Ghose in
respect of which a charge under section 124-A. Penal Code was framed. The printer and
publisher was tried alone and convicted by the officiating Chief Presidency Magistrate
and sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment.
Held, that a letter or an article in a newspaper containing an attack on a rival
political organization and not on the Government established by law in British India,
is not seditious within the meaning of s. 124 A of the Penal Code, A man may
criticise or comment on any act or measure of the Government, legislative or executive,
an i freely express his opinion on it. He may express the strongest condemnation of
such measures and be may do so severely and even unreasonably, perversely or unfairly
provided, he does not, whether in his comments on measures, or not hold up the Govern-
ment itself to hatred and contempt. It is not sedition for a writer to describe the Reform
Scheme as being monstrous and misbegotten, because it is not founded on democratic*
principles and not a genuine reform or a genuine initiation of constitutional progress,, or
to assert that some of the police officials and the judiciary are corrupt, unscrupulous
and partial or to state that if an organisation which he believes to be lawful is
suppressed by proclamation it is arbitrary, and that in such case the responsibility
will not rest on him for the madness which crushes down open and legal political activity
in order to give a desperate and sullen unscrupulous forces, or to inculcate the doctrine
of the Government within legal limits, or to describe the British Courts in India as ruinously
expensive. In construing a newspaper article its meaning must be taken from the article
as a whole and not from isolated passages. Words and expressions such as arbitrary
executive must not be looked at as if the writer was a constitutional lawyer instead of a
journalist. Articles not forming the subject of the charge and appearing in other issues of
the same paper are not admissible to show the intention of the writer in the article com-
plained of in the absence of proof of his identity. The declared printer and publisher of a
letter or article in a newspaper is amenable to the law merely on proof that it is calculated to
excite feelings of disaffection, hatred or contempt against the Government but the prosecu-
tion must prove either that the writer does in fact excite such feelings or that his intention
was to do so. The writer of an article may be guilty of sedition, no matter how guardedly
he attempts to conceal his real object, but the registered printer and publisher cannot be
punished if the concealed object is not established by the evidence on the record.
Mamnohan Ghose v. Empreor. (Karmyogin Case.) 38 Cal 253.
24 CASE OF SEDITION
(15) A single expression that the people of Bengal are trodden tinder the feet of
outsiders used incidentally in a newspaper article, otherwise innocuous, does not)
constitute the whole seditious. An article imputing wholosale bribery to the ministerial
officers of the law courts and to the lower officers of the police force, and expressing
grave doubts as towhether the Government ever inquire into such abuses, so much
is it occupied with investigations of boycott, dacoity and sedition, published when sedition is
rife and the minds of people excited may have the effect of creating a feeling that the Go-
vernment is not doing its duty, and exceeds the limits of fair comment and is seditious, irres-
pecpective of the question of the truth of the allegations. Where the writer of an article
inveighed both against the Babus and Meahs as professing brotherhood with the poor
Mahomedan ryots and then robbing them, and referred to the alleged conduct of Christian
missionaries towards their converts, by way of illustration, without any deleberate attempt
to excite one class against another, tha conviction under s. 153-A. of the Penal Code was
set aside as bad in law. Per Richardson, J. : — If a particular article is charged as being
seditious on the ground that it says more than appears on the face of it, it is the duty of
of the prosecution to show that it has, in fact, the guilty meaning or intent attributed to it.
Semble : — An appeal lies under ss. 35 (3) and 408, prov. (c), directly to the High Court from
a conviction and separate sentences under ss. 124- A. and 153-A. of the Penal Code passed
on the same trial.
Joy Chandra Sarkar v. Emperor, (Rangpur Bartabah) (1910) 38 Cal. 227.
(16) The declared printer or publisher of a newspaper containing seditious articles ia
responsible for them unless he makes out, on sufficient evidence, that he had in fact nothing
to do with them. Where the editor of a newspaper was convicted and sentenced under sec-
tion 124 A of the Penal Code, and the accused made his declaration as printer and publisher
thereafter, and continued so to act after the editor had resumed work on release from jail,
and further allowed his name to appear as such though he was absent from the town of
publication of the paper when certain seditious articles appeared therein and engaged
during the period in his own private business without taking any interest in the paper, it
was held that he had not made out the bona fides of his absence, and was, therefore,
legally responsible for the articles.
Surendra Prosad Lahiri v. Emperor. 38 Cal. 214.
(17) The accused was charged at one trial with having committed offences punishable
under s. 124 A and 153 A of the Indian Penal Code, on two charges, one with respect to
each of the two articles he published on different dates in his newspaper called the Hind
Swarajya, At the trial there was no other evidence of the publication of the newspaper
in Bombay except the declaration made by the accused under the Press Act, and the depo-
sition of witnesses who received the newspaper in Bombay as Government servants in
their capacity as such. The accused was convicted on both the charges and sentenced
separately on each of them. It was contended in appeal that there was no evidence of the
publication of the newspaper in Bombay, and that there was a misjoinder of charges
vitiating the trials. Held, that the evidence on record was sufficient to prove the publica-
tion of the newspaper in Bombay. Held, further, that the trial was not bad as there
had been no misjoinder of charges. Per Chandavai kar J, .—It is true that the Magistrate
framed two charges one with respect to each of the two articles. But in each charge the
offences are mentioned as being those punishable under s. 124A. and 153A. of the
Indian Penal Code, so that the accused had distinct notice of the charges he had to
answer, and he could hardly have been prejudiced by the somewhat informal mode in
which the charges were drawn up. The defect, if any, was no more than a mere
irregularity, cured by the provisions of s. 225 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, There
is nothing in the Criminal Procedure Code which directs that where an accused
person is alleged to have done two or more acts, each of which may fall within the defini-
tion of an offence under one or another section of the Indian Penal Code the section or
sections in either case being the same, the joinder of the charges under those sections is
illegal. Substantially the acts amount in such a case to offences punishable under the same
sections of the Indian Penal Code and therefore they are offences of the same kind. Per
ffeaton J :— Section 234 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not say that at most, a trial
must be limited to three charges : it says it must be limited to three offences and that the
offences must be of the same kind. The "offence "as defined by the Code itself, is the act
or omission made punishable. The offences in this case were two in number, namely, the
publication of two articles on two different dates. These two offences were, as charged,
punishable under the same section of the Indian Penal Code, and were, therefore, offences
of the same kind. The word " section " in section 234 of the Criminal Piocedure Code is not
invariably to be read as singular. It is not the intention of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
either express or implied, to exclude from the operation of s. 234 of the Code, an offence
because it is made the subject of more than one charge. Charging one act or series of acts
under more than one section of the Indian Penal Code, is a proceeding provided for in
s. 235 (clause 2) and in s. 236 of the Criminal Procedure Code and is also provided for in
s. 71 of the Indian Penal Code, The Court m»y charge an offence twice over under two
different sections but by BO doing it cannot increase the sentence which may by imposed.
CASES OF SEDITION" 25
That principle is not offended by trying together separate offences for each of which there i»
more than one charge.
Emperor v. Tribhovandas Purushottam Dass Mangoolewalla. fHind Swaraja Case,)
33 Born. 77.
(18) Section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code only requires that the complaint should
be made upon authority from, the Local Government and not that the actual complaint
must be expressly authorised by the Local Government. The Court hits only to seer
whether the complaint is made by order or under authority of Government. Where a police
officer files a complain* in a non-cognisable case or regarding- an offence of which it ia
not his duty to- report, such complaint is a complaint within section 4 (6) »f the Criminal
Procedure Code and' is not a- police report. A complaint is not defective because it did
not set out the speeches or alleged seditious words which form the subject matter of the *
subsequent charge. Even if such omission is a defect, it is an irregularity which will be
cared by section 537 («) unless it has occasioned a failure of justice; When a- magistrate,
after duly taking cognisance of a case under section 200, Criminal Procedure Code, makes
an order to investigate not authorised by law, such unauthorised order does not vitiate
subsequent proceedings. A charge of an offence under section 124A is defective if it does
not set out the speeches alleged to be seditious ; but such defect does not, under
sections 537 aud 2*25 of the Code- of Criminal Procedure, vitiate the proceedings
and any objection on the ground of such defect ought to be taken as early
as possible. Where certain speeches form the subject mutter of a charge for sedition.-
and when such speeches form part of a series of speeches »r lectures on one topic,
delivered within a short period of time, any of such speeches or lectures will be admissible,
under section 14 of the Evidence Act, as evidence to prove the intention of the speakers,
in respect of the speeches which form' the subject of the charge. The offence of abetting
under section 109, Indian Penal Code, plus presence of the abettor on- the occasion' of the
crime abetted is,, constructively, under section 1 14, the offence abetted, and a sanction-
under^section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to prosecute for am offence under section.
124A will authorise a complaint under s. 124A and section 114. Where an agree-
ment exists between two parties, in pursuance of which speeches are delivered' by theu^.
fiuch speeches are admissible to prove the object of the agreement.
V. O. Chidambaram Filial and- Subramania Siva, v. Emperor (1908). 32 Mad. 3.
(19) The Criminal Procedure Code, in so far as- it interferes with the mode of trial by
jury,, is not ultra vires under the proviso to B-. 22 of the Indian Council's Act (24 & 25- Vic. cv
67). An European British subject can, under section 454 of the Code relinquish his right to be
dealt with as such. Where- the magistrate explained to such a person the nature of the
charges framed against him^ and his rights under ss. 447 and 450, and then asked him:
whether he- claimed to be dealt with as such, and the latter stated that he did not
claim the right :-- Held that lie had relinquished the right. Where an order under s,196 of
the Criminal Procedure Code authorized a particular police officer to prefer a complaint of
offences under ss, 12 1 A. 122, 123, and 124 of the Penal Code " or under any other section of the
said code which may be found applicable to the case, " and the examination of the complain-
ant also referred to the same section -.—Held that no complaint under s, 121 of the Penal Code
was thereby authorized by the Local Government or in< fact preferred, that the Magistrate
had no* power to commit thereunder and that the defect was not cured by a subsequent order
obtained while case was before the Sessions Court, authorizing a complaint under the section?
which was not in fact made thereafter ; nor did s. 532 of the Criminal Procedure Code apply
in such a cuse. The Local Government cannot delegate toany other body or person the contro*-
ling power and discretion of determining whether cognizance shall be taken by the- Court of
an offence mentioned in s. 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and its-judgment must be> spe-
cifically directed to the particular section, and no other, under which the prosecution is to be
carried on, and the order or authority should be- preceded by a deliberate determination in this
respect. Any order authorizing a complaint under certain specified sections " or under any
other .lections found applicable,'' if it means fouud by any one other than Government, Involves
a delegation which cannot be sustained. Where the accused were all alleged tt> have- been
members of a secret society, with its head-quarters in Maniktolla in the suburbs, aud ita places
of meeting in Calcutta and elsewhere, and to have joined in the unlawful enterprise, and
with others, known and unknown, to have conspired to wage war or to deprive the King of
the Sovereignty of British India, and to have collected arms and ammunition with such intent
and to have actually waged war : — Held, that the joint trial of the accused on charges under
sections 121, 121 A, 12^ and 123 of the Penal Code was not bad for misjoinder of persons
or charges. A confession- under section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code must be
made either in the course of an investigation under Chapter XIV or after it has ceased and
before the commencement of the inquiry or trial. The condition requiring the confession to>
be prior to the commencement of the inquiry or trial is only imposed when the investigation
has ceased, and not when it is made in the coarse of the police investigation. Where a
number of persons were arrested on the 1st May, and the confessions of some of them were
recorded on the 4-th and 5th, while others were brought in subsequently and; their confession*
26 CASES OF SEDITION.
taken, while the police investigation was then actually going on, and on the 17th an order
under s. 196 was obtained and the police report sent in, and on the next day the examina-
tion of the prosecution witnesses begun : — Held, that the Magistrate did not take
cognizance under & 190 of the Code, nor did the inquiry commence on the 4th and that
the confessions were taken in the course of an investigation under Chapter XIV. The
fact that the Magistrate who has taken the confessions, afterwards holds the inquiry, doea
not, under section 164, constitute the recording of the confessions an examination of the
accused in the course of it and at its commencement. Section 164 includes confessions
taken by a Magistrate who afterwards holds such inquiry or trial. Sections 164, 342 and
864 of tho Code are not exhaustive, and do not limit the generality of section 21 of the
Evidence Act as to the relevancy of admissions. The mere fact that a statement was>
elicited by a question does not make it irrelevant as a confession under section 164 of
the Criminal Procedure Code or section 29 of the Evidence Act, though such fact may
bp material on the question of its voluntariness. Methods of proving handwriting
discussed, A document does not prove itself, nor is an unproved signature proof of its
having been written by the person whose signature it purports to bear. Section 73
of the Evidence Act does not sanction the comparison of any two documents, but
requires, first, that the standard writing shall be admitted or proved to be that of
tho person to whom it is attributed ; and, secondly, that the disputed writing must itself
purport to have been written by the same person. A comparison of hand-writing is at all
times as a mode of proof, hazardous and inconclusive, and especially so when made by one
not conversant with the subject and without guidance from the arguments of Counsel and
evidence of experts. The value of expert evidence of handwriting discussed. To constitute
an admission, the document need not be written by the party against whom it is used :
it is sufficient if it is found in his possession, and his conduct thereto creates an inference
that he was aware .of its contents and admitted their accuracy ; but, unless this is done,
the document cann be used against him as proof of its contents. What conduct would
properly give rise t° such inference depends on the fact of each case. The mere face of
possession of letters is not of much value, unless it is shown that their contents were
recognized and adopted by the replies elicited or the conduct inspired by them. The expres-
sion "wage* war" in a. 121 of the Penal Code must be construed in its ordinary sense,
and a conspiracy to wage war, or the collection of men, arms and ammunition for that pur-
pose is not waging war. An agreement between two or more persons to do all or any of the
unlawful acts mentioned in section 124-A of the Penal Code is an offence, and the
fact of the purpose not being immediate is only material in connection with s. 95. No. proof
is necessary of direct meeting or combination, nor need the persons be brought into each
other's presence ; but the agreement may be inferred from circumstances raising a presump-
tion of a common concerted plan to carry out the unlawful design. Nor is it necessary
that all the accused should have joined in the scheme for its inception. Eliciting answers
that is admissible, is not distinguishable from " legal proof." Save when an accused person
is being examined under section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code, there is nothing to
prevent a Magistrate from eliciting information from him by independent enquiry so long
as the information is voluntarily given. A statement by an accused to the police, which
telU against him but does not amount to an admission of guilt, is admissible in evidence,
Each case must be decided as it arises with reference to the question whether the particular
statement is or is not a confession. Handwriting may, in addition to the usual
methods, bo proved by circumstantial evidence under section 67 of tho Evidence Act
which prescribes no particular kind of proof.
Barendra Kumar Ghose and others v. Emperor (1909) 37 Cal. 467.
(20 ) It is not necessary, in order to establish the fact of publication of seditious matter
transmitted through the Post office, on a charge under section 124-A of the Penal Code, to prove
the actual posting nor that it was printed and published under the directions of the accused.
If the seditious writing is shown to bo in the hand- writing of the accused, and it is further
proved that the contents were' in fact printed and published, there is sufficient evidence of
publication by him. The sending through the post of apacket containing a manuscript copy
of a seditious publication with a covering letter requesting the addressee to circulate it among
others, when the same was intercepted by another person and never reached the addressee,
constitutes an attempt within the purview of section 124-A of the Penal Code,
Surendra Narayan Adhicary v, Emperor (1912^ 39 Cal, 522.
(21J On a charge under s, 124-A of the Penal Code the sendingof a pamphlet by post,
addressed to a piivate individual not by namo, but by designation as the representative of a*
l.irgp body of .-tml'Mits, amounts to publication, It is necessary for the admission of evidence
of a hand-writing expert, under s. 45 of the Evidence Act, that the writing with which the
comparison is made should be admitted or proved beyond doubt to be that of the person
alleged, and that the comparison should be made in open Court in the presence of such person,
buresh Chandra Sanyal V, Empror. (1912^ 39 Cal o'OG,
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, S. 108. 27
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE—SECTION 108.
Extract from Select Committee's Report, dated the 16th October 1898.
Clause 10S. — We have inserted as clause 108 the clause of which
notice was given by the Government on the 21st December last. In
inserting it"we have made the following modifications : —
We have confined the jurisdiction to Chief Presidency and District
Magistrates, and we have provided that the bond may be with or without
sureties.
We have cut out the reference to " obscene matter, " as we think
that that is sufficiently provided for by the ordinary law. We have
explained the reference to " seditious matter " by reference to the provi-
sions of the proposed new section 124 A of the Indian Penal Code, and
we have included matter punishable under the proposed new section
153 A of that Code.
We have cut out the reference to " defamatory matter " as that term
is much too wide, and after consideration we have substituted the words
" any matter concerning a Judge which amounts to criminal intimidation
or defamation under the Indian Penal Code. " The term " Judge " will,
of course, have the meaning assigned to it by the Indian Penal Code.
This perhaps does not protect all the public officers who, we think, are
entitled to protection, but it is difficult to draw any other satisfactory
line.
We have considered the question whether these orders should be
subject to appeal or revision and we have come to the conclusion that they
ought to be subject to revision, as the High Court can then act of its own
motion as well as on the petition of the party aggrieved. In case there
should be any doubt on the point, we have provided in clause 439 (6) that
all orders under the Code (not expressly excepted) made by an inferior
Court shall be subject to revision by the High Court.
Sd. M. D. Chalmers, C. M. Rivaz, R. M. Sayani, Bishamber Nath,
C C. Stevens, H. T. Prinsep, J. D. La Touche.
The Ib'th February, 1898.
Minutes of dissent appended by the Hon'ble Mr. R. M. Sayani, and^Hon'ble Pundit
Bishamber Nath.
Extract fram tht Note of Dissent by the Hon'ble Mr. R. M. Sayani, dated
the 16th February 1898.
I sign the report subject to the following observations :
o
* # * * *
Section 108. — This is a most objectionable section. Simply on informa-
tion, which may or may not be true, any person, alleged to be disseminating,
or attempting to disseminate, or in anywise abetting the dissemination of
seditious matter or any matter the publication of which is punishable
under section 153 A, may be required to give security for good behaviour,
and on failing to give such a security may be rigorously imprisoned. This
section should, therefore, be omittsd. If it is, however, retained, it
should not be put into force without previous Government sanction ; all
orders made under it should be subject to appeal to, and revision by, the
High Court ; the period of security should be reduced to one month and
sureties should not be required.
"2ft CRIMINAL PROCEDTTKE CODE, S. It) 8,
Orders under this clause have no doubt been made subject to revision
fcy High Court, but that procedure would place a person concerned rather
under a considerable disadvantage, as, under sub-section (1) of s. 439
of the Criminal Procedure Code, the High Court may, in its discretion,
exercise any of the powers confeired in a court of appeal by certain sec-
tions specified therein. Besides, as a matter of practice, the High Courts
are generally not disposed in the exercise of their Re visional powers to go
into questions of appreciation of the weight of evidence.
* . • * * * *
Extracts from 4he Note oj Dissent by ike Hon'ble Pundit Bishambar Natk,
dated the l'6th February 1898.
Clause 108. — The insertion as clause 108 of the clause of which notice
was given by the Government on the 21st December last is, I submit,
objectionable. Besides other exceptions to which it is open, the extension
of the powers it confers is not safeguarded by a righb of appeal to the
High Court ; while the scope of the clause is calculated to bring all
newspapers under a complete control of Magistrates, many of whom might
not be indisposed to give effect to the provisions of the clause upon mere
information.
It is desirable also to subject the initiation of proceedings under this
clause, if it is allowed to stand in its present form, to the sanction of the
Local Government, which is already provided for prosecutions either under
124 A or the proposed new section 153 A.
******
Schedule II, Sections 12%. A and 153 A of column 8. — The alteration
proposed to be made here, for making offences under sections 124 A and
153 A triable by the Chief Piesidency or District Magistrate, is open to
a grave objection. There is no question of lending undue eclat or giving
notoriety to proceedings in cases of sedition. In absence of a specific
provision in the Code, allowing such trials to be held in themufassal with
the aid of jury, it is desirable, in the ends ofjustice, that persons accused
oi offences of sedition should be triable by independant Tribunals com-
manding the confidence of the people, so that no cause for any supposed
distrust might arise.
A High Court or Sessions Court allowed to try cases with the aid of
jury or assessors would generally be preferable to a District Magistrate,
as in the majority of instances such prosecutions are likely to originate
on his motion ; and ordinarily he is the chief executive authority also.
If the law of sedition here is to be assimilated to the law of Great Britain,
why should not the same safeguards be extended here which the humanity
of the law allows there ?
The Code provides remedy in such cases to apply for leave to transfer
to High Court ; but the procedure is attended with difficulties against
which an accused person would have to contend, presumably to his
disadvantage.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE,— SECTION 108.
Security for good behaviour from persons disseminating seditious matter.
Whenever a Chief Presidency or District Magistrate, or a Presidency
Magistrate of the first class specially empowered by the Local Government,
in this behalf, has information that there is within the limits of his
EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES ACT. 29
jurisdiction any person, who, within or without such limits, either orally
•or in writing, disseminates or attempts to disseminate, or in any wise
abets the dissemination of, —
(a) any seditious matter, that is to say, any matter the publication of
which is punishable under section 124 A of the Indian Penal
Code, or
(6) any matter the publication of which is punishable under section
153Aof the Indian Penal Code, or
(c) any matter concerning a Judge which amounts to criminal inti-
midation or defamation under the Indian Penal Code,
such Magistrate may (in manner hereinafter provided) require such person to
show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond, with or with-
out sureties for his good behaviour for such period, not exceeding one year,
as the Magistrate thinks fit to fix.
No proceedings shall be taken under this section against the editor,
proprietor, printer or publisher of any publication registered under, or
printed or published in conformity with, the rules laid down in the Press
and Registration of Books Act, 1867, except by the order or under the
authority of the Governor-General in Council or the Local Government or
some officer empowered by the Governor-General in Council in this behalf.
Note*.
(1) The provisions of Ch, VIII of Cr. Pro. Code, 1898, are preventive in their scope and object
and are aimed at persons who are a danger to the public, by reason of the commission by
them of certain offences. The test under a. If 8 is whether the person proceeded against haa
been disseminating seditious matter, and whether there is a fear of a repetition of the offenc*.
In each case it is a question of fact which must be determined with reference to the antece-
dents of the person and other surrounding circumstances.
Emperor v- Vaman. 11 Bom. I> Rt 743.
(2) (The term "swam/" does not necessarily mean Government of the country to the
exclusion of the present Government, but its ordinary acceptance is "home rule" under
the Government. The incitement of the members of a public meeting to exert themselves
to secure ''Swaraj" does not amount to the offence of sedition under s. 124-A of the
Penal Code, and is consequently not within the purview of s. 108 of the Criminal
Procedure Code.
Beni Bhushan Hoy v. Emperor (1907), 34 I. Cal. 991.
ACT No. VI OF 1908.
PASSED BY THE GOVERNOR GENERAL OF INDIA IN COUNCIL.
(Received the assent of the Governor General on the 8th June, 1908.)
An Act further to amend the law relating to explosive substances.
Whereas it is necessary further to amend the law relating to explosive
substances ; It is hereby enacted as follows :—
short title, extent and ap- 1. (1) This Act may be called the Explosive
Plication. Substances Act, 1908.
(2) It extends to the whole of British India and applies also to —
(a) all native Indian subjects of His Majesty in any place without
and beyond British India ;
(b) all other British subjects within the territories of any native
prince or chief in India,
30 EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES ACT.
i
2. In this Act the expression "explosive substance," shall be deemed to
Definition "explosive include auy materials for making any explosive
substance". substance; also any apparatus, machine, imple-
ment or material used, or intended to be used, or
adapted for causing, or aiding in causing, any explosion in or with any
explosive substance ; also any part of any such apparatus, machine or
implement.
(3) Any person who unlawfully and maliciously causes by any
explosive substance an explosion of a nature
,E±^yV£X£ Hkely to endanger life or to cause wriona
life or property, injury to property shall, whether any injury
to person or property has been actually caused
or net, be punished with transportation for life or any shorter term to
which fine may be added, or with imprisonment for a term which may
extend to ten years, to which tine may be added.
Punishment for attempt to
"?*MsrexP££e . ?• Any person who unlawfully and mail-
with intent to endanger life ClOUSly.
•or property;
(a) does any act with intent to cause by an explosive substance
or conspires to cause by an explosive substance, an explosion
in British India of a nature likely to endanger life or to cause
serious injury to property; or
(b) makes or has in his possession or under his control any explosive
substance with intent by means thereof to endanger life, or
cause serious injury to property in British India, or to enable
any other person by means thereof to endanger life or cause
serious injury to property in British India ;
shall, whether any explosion does or does not take place and whether
any injury to person or property has been actually caused or not, be pun-
ished wi£h transportation for a term which may extend to twenty years,
to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment for a term which may
extend to seven years, to which fine may be added,
5. Any person who makes or knowingly has in his possession or under
his control any explosive substance, under such
Punishment for making or circumstances as to give rise to a reasonable
£K£g±U£* ««pfci«* 'hat he is not «»«tt«g it <« does not
have it in his possession or under his control for
a, lawful object, shall, unless he can show that he made it or had it in his
possession or under his control for a lawful object, be punishable with
transportation for a term which may extend to fourteen years, to which
fine may be added, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend
to five years, to which fine may be added.
Panishment of abettors, . .6V . "^ PerSOa "J10 ty *he *W*J °f or
solicitation for money, the providing of premises,
the supply of materials, or in any manner whatsoever, procures, counsels,
aids, abets, or is accessory to, the commission of any offence under this Act
shall be punished with the punishment provided for the offence.
Restriction on trial of 7. No Court shall proceed to the trial of
oflences. any person for an offence against this Act
•xcept with the consent of the Local Government or the Governor-General
in Council,
EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES ACT. 31
Statement of Objects and Reasons.
Recent events have brought prominently to notice fch'e inadequacy of
the existing law to deal with crimes committed by means of explosive
substances. The Indian Explosives Act, 1884, was framed to prevent
accidents rather than to prevent crime and its provisions are clearly
inadequate to meet the present emergency. No sentence of imprisonment?
can be imposed under that Act and the maximum penalty is only a fine of
three thousand rupees. The Indian Arms Act, 1H78, though it applies to
the possession of explosives as well as arms, is also inadequate in respect
both of the penalties it allows and the scope of its provisions for dealing
promptly with preparations tu manufacture bombs and other explosives.
The Penal Code provides for the punishmeut of persons who cause hurt or
mischief by means of explosive substances and it also deals with attempts
to cause hurt or mischief but only when any act towards the commission
of the offence is actually done. But it does not provide any penalty for
making or possessing explosive substances with unlawful intent and it does
not in other cases always provide such severe penalties as are requisite.
The Governor-General in Council therefore considers it necessary to sup-
plement the existing law by an Act on the lines of the English Explosive
Substances Act, 1S88, which was enacted for the express purpose of deal-
ing with anarchist crimes. The Bill which has been drafted to give effect
to this decision provides for the punishment of any person who causes an
explosion likely to endanger life or property, or who attempts to cause such
an explosion, or makes or has in his possession any explosive substance
with intent to endanger life or property. It further makes the manu-
facture or possession of explosive substances for any other than a lawful
object a substantive offence and throws on the person who makes ®r is in
possession of any explosive substance the onus of proving that the making
or possession was lawful. It also provides adequately for the punishment
both of principals and accessories.
6th June 1908. H. ADAMSON.
Notes.
(1) Where a complaint was filed by a sub-Inspector of Police before the Sub-divisional
Magistrate of an offence under s. 399 of the Penal Code, (and the facts disclosed also an
offence under 8. 4 (b) of the Explosive Substances Act (VI of 1908), of which the Magistrate
could not then take cognizance for Want of the consent of Government under section 7 of the
Act, and a complaint was subsequently filed by the Superintendent of Police, with such
consent obtained, before the Additional District Magistrate i—Held, that the latter had
jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence and that the initiation and continuation of
the proccei lings by him were legal, notwithstanding that he had not withdrawn the original
case to his own file .—Held, also, that, in any case, having regard to sections 529 (e), 530(/j),
and 531 of the Criminal Procedure Code, unless it appeared that the proceedings wrongly
held had, in fact, occasioned a failure of justice, they could not be set aside. A search for
explosives by Police officers of rank not below that of an Inspector, is legal under rule
?2 (I) (h) of the Government Rules framed under the Indian Explosives Act (IV of 1884).
Section 309 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code requires the opinions of the Assessors to be
stated orally, and not in writing or in the form of a judgment under s. 367. Under s. 399
of the Penal Code, having in possession or immediate control any explosive substance is
one of several means to the end, whereas, under s. 4(6) of the Explosive Substances Act,
is the offence itself, provided the necessary intent is proved. In order to render documents
found in the possession of a party admissible against him as proof of their contents, it
is necessary to show that he has in some way identified himself or, in other words,
has by any act, speech or writing manifested an acquaintance with, and knowledge of the
contents of all or any of them. The rule would apply more strongly where some of the
papers and letters were received, and others written, by the party against whom they are
sought to be used,
Lalib Chandra Chanda Choudhuri v. Emperor. 39 CaL 119.
32 XXPLOSIVES SUBSTANCES ACT
(2) The three Appellants were tried iu the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge- of
Midnapore on charges framed under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and they were ea«h»
found guilty. Santosh Chandra Daa was convicted under sections 4 -a., 4-k, and; 5 and
sentenced to ten years transportation under s. 4-a. aud seven, years transportation under
8. 6, these sentences to run concurrently. Surendra Natb Mookerjee was convicted under
•. 4, 5 and 6 and sentenced to seven years transportation. Separate appeals were preferred
and each appellant separately represented in the High Court. Calcutta. The judgment ol
the Court was delivered by Jenkins, C. J. on the 1st June 1909. The conviction*
aud sentences were set aside and the appellants were directed to be released from, custody,
Jogjiban Ghosh, Santosh Chandra Das and Surendra Natb Muker jee Appellants v. the
Emperor. Reported in 13 C. W. N. 861,
(3) Per Woodroffe aud Coxe, J. J. On the question* of the standard of proof, there is but
one rule of evidence which in India applies to both Civil and Criminal trials and that is con-
tained in the definition of " proved " and " disproved " in Sec. 3 of the Evidence Act. The
test in each case is, would a prudent man after considering the matters before him (which
vary with each case) deem the fact in issue proved or disproved ? The Court can
never be bound by any rule but that which, coming from itself dictates a conscieutiou
and prudent exercise of its judgment. There is a presumption against crime and of
misconduct and the more heinous and improbable a crime is, the greater is the force
the evidence required to overcome such presumption. The English rule in these
matters does not, as such, apply in India. Jarat Kumari v. Bissesur Dutt. Where
a document is privileged from production, no adverse inference can be drawn from
its production. This rule applies as regards the party claiming privilege and a fortiori
it applies when the privilege is claimed by a third party. Although Section 125 of
the Evidence Act does not in express terms prohibit a witness, if he be willing, from
saying whence he got his information, the protection afforded by that section does not
depend upon a claim of privilege being made, but it is the duty of the Court, apart from
objection taken, to exclude such evidence. A fortiori, where privilege is claimed, no adverse
inference can be drawn therefrom. Where articles are found in a part of a house to which
several persons living in the house have access, such as a Baithakkha-ia, there is no
presumption that they are in the possession or control of any person other than the
Karta or head of the house. Semble : It is immaterial, in an action for malicious arrest,
under what section of an Act an arrest is made, if in fact the circumstances are such that
the Act justified arrest ; and a person making a search is entitled to call in aid any statute
which justifies his action, quite irrespective of whether it was present or not to his mind
when he made the search. The Court is entitled to ask Counsel, who, during the conduct of
a case makes charges of misconduct, whether he makes the charges on instructions and if so,
on whose. It is not sufficient to plead instructions. Counsel have a responsibility in the
matter and are not justified iu making serious charges of fraud and crime unless they ar»
personally satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for putting them forward. Instructions
to counsel are only privileged in the sense of being protected from disclosure to the opponent.
There is no privilege as against the Court. The latter cannot use them as evidence in the
case and for the purpose of the trial, would have to treat them as confidential, but they could
be called for then and there and be used after the trial for determining whether disciplinary
action should be taken against Counsel by the full Court. Whenever a Court relies on a
book of reference, such as a work on medical Jurisprudence, it should be made known at the
trial to the parties, so that they may have an opportunity of adducing evidence or argument
on the point. The following resolutions of the Bar Council approved : —
(a)lt Counsel knows or has reason to believe that he will bejan important witness in a case
be ought not to accept retainer therein, (b) If he accepts a retainer not knowing or having
reason to believe that he will be such a witness, but at the opening or at any subsequent
stage before evidence is concluded it becomes apparent that he is a witness on a material
question of fact, he ought not to continue to appear in the case unless be cannot retire without
jeopardising the interests of his client, (c) If Counsel knows or has reason to believe that
his own professional conduct on matters out of which the action arises is likely to be im-
pugned in the case, he ought not to accept a retainer, (d) If he accepts a retainer not knowing
or having reason to believe that his own professional conduct in such matters is likely to
be impugned, but finds in the course of the case that it is so impugned, he ought to adopt
the same course of conduct as is mentioned in clause (b) ante. (e). In either of the cases
mentioned in clauses (b) and (d) there is no rule of professional ethics which debars
Counsel, if he continues to act as Counsel in the case, from going into the witness box and
being cross examined ."
Although the resolutions of the Bar Council are not binding on the Courts, the Bar
Council is the recognised authority on matters of professional conduct and etiquette affecting
Counsel and its opinion is of the greatest weight and value. There ia nothing necessarily
unprofessional in Counsel giving evidence iu a case in which he appears as suoh. As a
EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES ACT: S3
general practice, however, it is undesirable when the matter to which Counsel depose is
other than formal, that they should testify either for or against the party whose case they
are conducting Under section 118 of the Evidence Act, Counsel although they may be
in the case, are competent to testify whether the facts in respect of which they give their
evidence occur before or after their retainer. The rule laid down in section 114 section (g)
of the Evidence Act that the Court may presume that evidence which could' be and is not
produced, would, if produced, be unfavourable to the party who withholds it, was held to
apply to the case of Counsel engaged in a suit who should not have been, under the
circumstances counsel, but should have been called as a Witness. It is unprofessional for
Counsel to cross examine a witness as to facts within his personal knowledge. Where
Counsel during the hearing of a case ca-lls for the production of a book, which is produced
and handed to him by his opponent with certain pages marked as those only to which he
may refer in respect of the subject matter of his cross examination, it is improper for Counsel
who calls for tire book to inspect any of the other pages. If a suit on a tort is barred as
against one person, the period of limitation cannot be extended because it happens to be
against three persons who are alleged to have committed the tort in conspiracy, The same
set of facts cannot constitute separate causes of action., both for a tort, and for a conspiracy
to cause damage A suit for damages for false imprisonment or malicious prosecution
against joint tort feasers, is governed by the one year rule under articles IV, and 23 of the
Limitation Act. There are instances in which two or more persons can render themselves
liable to civil proceedings by combining to in j ore the plantiff, although, if one of them did
the same act by himself and without any preconcert with others, he would escape liability,
An action on such a conspiracy would lie in this country. In an action on conspiracy
special damage must be proved. Per Chatterji. J. — There is no authority for holding that a
tort, when committed by several persons acting in concert, is different from the same tort
committed by a single individual, The combination in such cases may be an element of
aggravation in the assessment of damages, but does not suffice to make it a different tort*
Conspiracy or wrongful combination is not a material element in the constitution of a
wrong.
The above is an extract of High Court judgment on appeal by the Defendants, Donald
Weston, Mazharul.'Huq and Lall Mohan Guha in the suit of Pyari Mohan Dass v Westou
and others, fto:n the judgment of Fletcher J. This suit was originally instituted in the
Court of Second Sub- Judge Midnapore on 15th November 1909 and was transferred to the
High Court Calcutta, by an order of Fletcher J. dated 13th Jnne 1910.
This judgment is reported in 40 Cal. 898, and 16 C. W. N", 145.
(4) The charges against the accused were under s, 4 (ft) of the Explosive Substances Act,
1908, against four of them for having had in their possession or under their control explosive
substances with intent by means thereof to endanger life, and under s. 120-B. I P.C., against
all for having conspired with one another and other persons to ruake and keep explosive
substances with intent by means thereof to endanger life or enable other persons to endan-
ger life. — Held— That the defect in the charge under s. 4(b) of the Explosive Substances
Act, inasmuch as it omitted to state that the accused were in possession of explosive sub-
stances or had them under their control " unlawfully and maliciously" and that it was the
intent of the accused to endanger life in " British India " did not vitiate the trial and con-
viction and the case was covered by s. 225 and by cl. (a) of s. 537 Criminal Procedure Code.
That the legality of the trial must be determined with reference to the language of s. 239
Criminal Procedure Code. That the trial was not bad on the ground that persons alleged to
be conspirators in the charge were not prosecuted, although their names and addresses
were known to the prosecution. That in stating the object of conspiracy the same
degree of certainty is not required as in an indictment for the offence conspired to. be
commited. That the charge of conspiracy must not be indefinite. That it was not obli-
gatory on the Crown to prosecute the accused under s. 121 A, even if the facts disclosed
that they committed an offence under that section. Where two or more persons have con-
spired together for committing some offence and one or more of them have committed that
offence in pursuance of the conspiracy, but others have not, it is permissible to charge and
try them together for the conspiracy as also for the substantive offence. That in Cricainal
cases there can be no conviction unless guilt is established with very great clearness. The
proof of the case against the prisoner must depend for its support, not upon the absence or
want of any explanation on the part of the prisoner himself, but upon the positive affirma-
tive evidence of his guilt that is given by the Crown, That on a charge of conspiracy
general evidence of the existence of the conspiracy may first be given, before
particular facts are proved to show that one or more of the defendants took part in
it That in the present trial the evidence adduced by the prosecution to establish
that some of the accused had associated, previous to the period of the conspiracy charged,,
with certain persons who were convicted under s. 121 A Indian Penal Code, was inadmis-
sible. That on a charge under s, 4. cl (&), of the Explosive Substances Act, which it is not
necessary to prove manual possession of the explosive substance by the accused, it must be
proved that it was in his power or control ; possession to be punishable must also be posses-
sion with knowledge and assent. That in the case of one of the accused, who had admittedly
34 EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES ACT.
assumed a false name, evidence should not have been allowed to prove the dishonourable
purpose for which the false name had been assumed, a purpose in no way connected witli the
conspiracy charged against him. That the Sessions Judge was right in disallowing ques-
tions put by the defence to elicit from individual prosecution witnesses whether he was a
spy or informer and also to discover from police officials the names of persons from whom
they had received information. That the procedure followed by the Sessions Judge in
accepting written statements from the accused was in accordance with the universal prac-
tice of the Courts of the province, but such written statements do not take the place of
evidence nor of such examination of the accused as is contemplated by the Code.
Amrita Lai Hazara v King Emperor (191 4). The case is reported in 19. C. W. N. 677 679.
(5) The finding on the 3rd charge (under section 120B, Indian Penal Code read with
section 19 (o) of the Arms Act) was that there was only a conspiracy to manufacture
without an actual manufacture, and the Sessions Judge sentenced the accused on this charge
to three year's rigorous imprisonment. Held, — That there was no misjoinder of charges, That
offences charged were committed in the same transaction and s 239, Cr. P, C,, authorises
such charges to be tried together,
Fletcher, J,— In cases of conspiracy the agreement between the conspirators cannot
generally be directly proved, but only inferred from other facts proved in the case. The
facts proved against the accused, namely, the hiring of the houses, the finding of a
Considerable number of parts of fire-arms in the house, the finding of tools there, also that
work had been done to some of the parts of fire-arms found, left no doubt that a conspiracy
existed between them to manufacture fire-arms.
Beachcrof t, J. — That the term " transaction '"is not synonymous with the term *' offence "
and so long as the conspiracy Continued, tne transaction which began with the forming of
the common intention continued and the offences of possession of fire-arms and conspiracy
to manufacture arms were committed in the same transaction.
That on a conviction under section 120B, I. P.C, , if an offence has been committed, the
punishment is provided by section 109, I, P, C., and if an offence has not been committed
the punishment is limited to the extent provided by section 116,
Semble — Strictly speaking, in cases where an offence has been committed in pursuance of
a conspiracy, there should not be any conviction for conspiracy, but for abetment of the
offence ; for conspiracy followed by an act done to carry out the purpose of conspiracy
amounts to abetment,
Khagendra Nath Chaudhuri v. The King Emperor. (1914), The ease is reported in
19 C. W. N, 706.
NEWSPAPERS (INCITEMENTS TO OFFENCES) ACT. 35
ACT No VII OF 1908.
PASSED BY THE GOVERNOR GENERAL OF INDIA IN COUNCIL,
{Received the assent of the Governor General on the 8th June 1908.)
An Act for the prevention of incitements to murder and to other
offences in newspapers.
Whereas it is expedient to make better provision for the prevention
of incitements to murder and to other offences in newspapers ; It is hereby
enacted as follows : —
1 (1) This Act may be called the News-
papers (Incitements to Offences) Act, 1908.
(%) It extends to the whole of British India.
2, (1) In this Act, unless there is anything
repugnant in the subject or context,-—
(a) " Magistrate " means a District Magistrate or Chief Presidency
Magistrate :
(6) "newspapers" means any periodical work containing public news
or comments on public news :
(c) " printing press " includes all engines, machinery, types, litho-
graphic stones, implements, utensils. and other plant or materials
used for the purpose of printing.
(#) Save as herein otherwise provided all words and expressions in this
Act shall have the same meanings as those respectively assigned to them
y of 1S98 in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
3. (T) In cases where, upon application made by order of or
Power to forfeit printing under authority from the Local Government,
presses in certain cases. a Magistrate is of opinion that a newspaper
printed and published within the Province contains any incitement
to murder or to any offence under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908,
VI of 1908 or to any ac^ °^ vi°lence> such Magistrate may
make a conditional order declaring the printing
press used, or intended to be used, for the purpose of printing or
publishing such newspaper, or found in or upon the premises where such
newspaper is, or at the time of the printing of the matter complained of
was, printed and all copies of such newspaper, wherever found, to be for-
feited to His Majesty, aud shall in such order state the material facts and
call on all persons concerned to appear before him, at a time and place to
be fixed by the order, to show cause why the order should not be made
absolute.
(2) A copy of such order shall be fixed on some conspicuous part of
the premises specified in the declaration made in the respect of such news-
WTT f IQ«* caper under section 5 of the Press and Registra-
XXV OI 1867- ». r „ ,, , A , .o/^rr r j.i
tion of Books Act, 18C7, or of any other premis-
es in which such newspaper is printed, and the affixing of such copy shall
be deemed to be due service of the said order on all persons concerned.
3$ NEWSPAPERS (INCITEMENTS TO OFFENCES) ACT.
(3) In cases of emergency or in cases where the purpose of the applica-
tion might be defeated by delay the Magistrate may, on or after the mak-
ing of a conditional order under sub-section (1), make a further order ex
parte for the attachment of the printing press or other property referred to
in the conditional order.
(4) K any person concerned appears and shows cause against the con-
ditional order, the Magistrate shall take evidence, whether in support of or
in opposition to such order, in manner provided in section 356 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
(5) If the Magistrate is satisfied that the newspaper contains matter of
the nature specified in sub-section (/), he shall make the conditional order
of forfeiture absolute in respect of such property as he may find to be with-
in the terms t)f the said sub-section.
(6) If the Magistrate is not so satisfied, he shall set aside the condition-
al order of forfeiture and the order of attachment, if any.
4. (1) The Magistrate may by warrant empower any Police-officer
not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector to seize
.r OWer tO ocl^c. i i j • 111 i'
and detain any property ordered to be attached
under section 3, sub-section (3), or to seize and carry away any property
ordered to be attached under section 3, sub-section (3)t or to seize and
carry away any property ordered to be forfeited under section 3, sub-
section (5), wherever found and to enter upon and search for such property
in any premises —
(a) where the newspaper specified in such warrant is printed
or published, or
(6) where any such property may be or may be reasonably suspect-
ed to be, or
(c) where any copy of such newspaper is kept for sale, distribution,
publication or public exhibition or reasonably suspected to be
so kept.
(£) Every warrant issued under sub-section (1) so far as it relates to
a search shall be executed in manner provided for the execution of search
^ f ,QQQ warrants by the Code of Criminal Procedure.
1898.
5. Any person concerned who has appeared and shown cause against a
A eal conditional order of forfeiture may appeal to the
High Court within fifteen days from the date
when such order is made absolute.
6. Save as provided in section 5, no order duly made by a Magistrate
Bar of other proceedings. under section 3, shall be called in question in
any Court.
7. Where an order of forfeiture has been made absolute in relation to
any newspaper the Local Government may, by
notification in the local official Gazette, annul
any Declaration made by the printer or publish-
er of such newspaper under the Press and Re-
XXV of 1867. gistration of Books Act, 1867, and may by such
notification prohibit any further declaration be-
ing made or subscribed under the said Act in respect of the said news-
paper, or of any newspaper which is the same in substance as the said
newspaper, until such prohibition be withdrawn.
NEWSPAPERS (INCITEMENTS TO OFFENCES) ACT, 37
8. Any person who prints or publishes any newspaper specified in any
penalt prohibition notified under section 7 during the
continuance of that prohibition shall be liable,
on conviction, to the penalties prescribed by section 15 of the Press and
XXV of 1867 Registration of Books Act, 1867.
Application of Code of Cri- 9. All proceedings under this Act shall be
minai Procedure. conducted so far as may be in accordance with
V of 1898 ^ne provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1898.
10. No proceedings taken under this Act shall operate to prevent any
Operation of other laws not person from being prosecuted for any act which
barred. constitutes an oftence under any other law.
Statement of Objects and Reasons.
The circumstances of the recent outrages by means of explosive sub-
stances have disclosed a close connexion between the perpetrators of such
outrages and certain newspapers which have from time to time published
criminal incitements. Experience has shown that prosecution under the
existing law is inadequate to prevent the publication of these incitements.
In the case of one newspaper, persons registered as printer and publisher
have been within a comparatively short period prosecuted and convicted
several times : while the real authors of the incitements have concealed their
identity. This newspaper notwithstanding these prosecutions continues to
exist and to pursue its criminal course. Nor ia it a solitary instance of the
kind.
It has therefore become necessary to make better provision for the
prevention of such incitements in newspapers. The scope of the present
Bill is confined to incitements to murder, to offences under the Explosive
Substances Act, 1908, and to acts of violence. It gives powers in such
cases to confiscate the printing press used in the production of the
newspaper and to stop the lawful issue of the newspaper.
The procedure adopted in the Bill follows the general lines of that
provided in the Code of Crimim! Procedure for dealing with public nui-
sances, with the important addition rh it the final order of the Magistrate
directing forfeiture of the press is appealable to the High Court within
fifteen days. It is further provided that no action can be taken against a
press save on the application of a local Government.
When an order of forfeiture has been made by the Magistrate, but
only in that case, the local Government is empowered to annul the declara-
tion made by the printer and publisher of the newspaper under the Press
and Registration of Books Act, 1867, and thereafter neither that news-
paper nor any other which is the same in substance can be published
without a breach of the law.
It is also provided that no proceedings taken under the Bill shall bar
the prosecution of any person for any act which constitutes an ofience
under any other law.
6th June 1908. H. ADAMSON.
38 NEWSPAPERS (INCITEMENTS TO OFFENCES) ACT.
(1) In 12 Bom 12') it was held that s, "3 refers to the press and no order could be made
tinder it limiting only to such portions ef the press as were employed in printing the
offending newspapers
(£) Dhondo was the owner of a printing press called the Aranyodaya Press at Thana. A
weekly newspaper called the *' Hindu Punch '' was printed at the aforesaid press. Some
of the issues of the newspaper contained articles which fell within the purview of the news-
paper (Incitements to Offences) Act, 1908. Under section 3 of the Act the District Magis-
trate of Thana on the 6th October 1909 passed a conditional order. for the forfeiture of the
whole of the Arunyodaya Press :and he made order absolute on the 18th idem. The appli-
cant applied to tho High Court contending tkat the Magistrate erred in making the order
applicable to the whole Printing plant and materials of the Press, but ought to have ordered
the forfeiture of the printing press (used for tke purpose of printing) or publishing the said
1 papers only. Held that clause (c) of section 2 defines printing press to include all engines
machinery, types, lithographic stones, implements, utensils and other plant or materials
fused for the purpose of printing. As the paper was printed at the Arunyodaya Press the
Magistrate was right in forfeiting the whole press as defined by the Act. .
In Re Dhondo Kashinath Phadke, 34 Bom 327.
(3) The question of the intention or knowledge of an individual may determine his crimi-
nal liability under the ordinary law of abetment by incitement by means of words written or
spoken, but under 'the Newspapers (Incitement t© Offences) Act no question of the intention
of the writer, printer or publisher arises, and personal liability is imputed to any particular
person. The order thereunder is not owe against auy person, but is purely restrictive and di-
rected against the use or intended use, of a press for the purpose of printing or publishing a
newspaper containing any incitement to murder or to any offences under the Explosive Sub-
stance Act [VI of 1908] or to any act of violence. The words " any incitement " in section
3 [1] of the Newspa'pers Act include direct and indirect incitement, and need not be address-
ed to any particular person, nor expressed in violent and outrageous terms. " To incite"
means " to move to action, to stir up, to stimulate, to instigate or to encourage ' and a news-
paper article comes within the scope of section 3 if it is, as a matter of fact, calculated di-
rectly or indirectly to produce that effect. Per Ryves, J. — There can be no hard and fasfc
canon as to what words or given set of words constitute " incitement." It is a question of
fact in each case, and must usually depend largely on concomitant circumstances The
articles must be read as a whole and, as far as possible, in the sense in which it was read
by the section of the public to which it was primarily addressed, and also considered with
regard to the occasion and place of publication and the class or status of persons liHely to
be affected by it. Girija Sundar Chackerbatty V. Emperor [1908]. 36 Gal 405-
(4) The definition of a " newspaper " in section 2 [1] [6] of Act VII of 19;)8 must be read
as a whole. It refers to a work which publishes periodically public news or comments
thereon. It is not enough to take a single issue of it, and to pick out an isolated sentence or a
paragraph therein which might by stretch of language be interpreted to contain public news
or comments thereon. When it is disputed whether a work is a " newspaper " the prosecu-
tion ought to establish its alleged character by proof of tke contents of more than one issue.
To bring a case under s. 3(1) the character of the offending paper as a " newspaper " has
to be first established, and this may not always be possible by the production and proof of the
contents of one issue only. In a proceeding under section 8 of the Act the newspaper and the
offending matter must be regularly proved. In such cases it is essential that the proceedings
should be regularly conducted and the forms of law observed. Section 3 [1] of the Act con-
fers very limited powers of forfeiture and only applies to the cases of presses used for the print-
ing of newspapers which contain an incitement to the particular crimes or class of crimes
specified therein. The word '• incitement "clearly implies the idea of rousing to action, in-
stigation or stimulation. The use of seditious language, sufficient to bring th > case under sec-
tion 124 A of the Penal Code, is not sufficient to bring the case within section 3 [1] of the Act.
There must be something mere direct and specific for that purpose. In the case of two prison-
ers regarding the guilt of one of whom only the Judges of the Appellate Court are divided in
opinion, it may be that what has to be laid before another Judge is the c&Be of such prisoner
alone. But where they are equally divided as to the guilt of one accused, though in certain
aspects they may be agreed, the whole case as regards the accused is laid before the third
Judge, and not merely the point or points on which there is a difference of opinion, and it is
his duty to consider all the points involved before delivering his opinion upon the case.
Sarat Chancfra Mitra V. Emperor. 38 Cal. 202.
CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1908, 30
ACT NO. XIV OF 1908,
PASSED BY THE GOVERNOR GENERAL OF INDIA IN COUNCIL.-
(Received the assent of the Governor -General on the llth December 1908.)
' An Act to provide for the more speedy trial of certain offences; and
for the prohibition of associations dangerous to the public peace.
Whereas it is expeditnfc to provide for the more speedy trial of certain
offences, and for the prohibition of associations dangerous to the public
peace ; It is hereby enacted as follows : —
1. (1) This Act may be called the Indian Criminal Law Amendment
Short title and extent. Act, 1 908.
(#) It extends to the Provinces of Bengal and ©f Eastern Bengal and
Assam ; but the Governor General in Council may, at any time, by
notification in the Gazette of India, extend the whole or any part thereof
to any other Province. (a)
(3) When extending Part I to any Province under sub-section (#) the
Governor-General in Council may declare the operation of any provisions
of that Part relating to the constitution of the Special Bench to be subject
to such modifications as may in the opinion of the Governor-General in
Council be necessary to adopt those provisions to- the circumstances of
that Province.
PART I.
SPECIAL PROCEDURE.
2, (1) Where a Magistrate has taken cognizance of any offence speci-
fied in the schedule, and it appears to the Gov-
ernor-General in Council or to the Local Govern-
ment that in interests of peace and good order the provisions of this Part
should be made to apply to proceedings in respect of such offence, the
Governor-General in Council, or the Local-Government, with the previous
sanction of the Governor-General in Council, may make an order in writing
to that effect and may by such order direct that the provision of this
Part shall apply to such proceedings.
(#) No order shall be made under sub- section (1) in any case in which
an order of commitment to the High Court or Court of Session has been
made under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898; but, save as aforesaid,
an order may be made in respect of any offence whether committed
before or after the commencement of the Act, or, in the case of a Province
to which this Part is extended under section 1, before or after such
extension.
•
3. (1) On receipt of an order under section 2 the Magistrate who has
taken cognizance of the offence, or any other
Inquiry by Magistrate, *7 • , ,° A Ai 11 , J ^
Magistrate to whom the case has been transfer-
red, shall proceed to inquire whether the evidence offered upon the part
of the prosecution is sufficient to put the accused upon his trial for an
offence specified in the Schedule, and shall for that purpose record on oath
(a) The whole of the Act has been extended to the Presidency of Bombay,* the Presi-
dency of Madras, United Provinces of Agra and Oudh the Punjab and the Central Provinces.f
* Notfn. No. 15 dated the 4th January 1910 and fNo. 65 dated the 13th January 1910.
40 CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1908,
the evidence of all such persons as may be produced in support of tfoer
prosecution, aud may record any statement of the accused if voluntarily
tendered by him.
(2) Where before the commencement of proceedings under this Act
the evidence of a witness has been recorded under the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1898, in the course of an inquiry into the same offence as that
to which such proceedings relate, such evidence may be treated for the
purposes of this Act as if it had been taken under sub-section (1).
4. The accused shall not be present during an inquiry under section 3,
. sub-section (1), unless the Magistrate so directs,
nor shall he be represented by a pleader during
any such inquiry, nor shall any person have any right of access to the
Court of the Magistrate while he is holding such inquiry.
5. When the evidence referred to in section 3 has been taken, the
Magistrate shall, if he finds that it is not sufficient
When accused person to be dis- to pufc tne accused upon his trial for an offence
specified in the Schedule, record his reasons and
discharge the accused, unless it appears to the Magistrate that the accused
should be tried or committed for trial under the provisions of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1898, for any other offence, in which case the Magis-
trate shall proceed accordingly.
6. When upon such evidence being taken the Magistrate is satisfied
that it is sufficient to put the accused upon his
Power to send accused for t j | for ftn offence specified in the Schedule, he
trial, , ,|
shall : —
(a) frame a charge under his hand declaring with what offence the
accused is charged ;
(b) make an order directing that the accused be sent to the High
Court for trial ; and
(c) cause the accused to be supplied with a copy of the order and of
the charge and of the evidence taken under section 3.
7. la framing any charge under section 6 the Magistrate may also
frame a charge for any offence not specified in
Joinder of charges. ^e gcno(juie with which the accused may be
charged at the same trial, and the procedure of this Act shall apply to any
such charge.
8. When an order for trial has been made under section 6, the Magis-
' . . trate shall send the order together with the
Charge,ete,gto be^rward ^.^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ .^.^ ^ anything
which is to be produced in evidence to the Clerk
of the Crown or other officer appointed in this behalf by the High Court.
9. (1) The Magistrate may, if he thinks fit, summon and examine sup-
Power to summon supplement- plementary witnesses after the order for trial
ary witness. an<i before the commencement of the trial.
(%) When the Magistrate examines witnesses under sub-section (7) he
shall forthwith cause the accused to be supplied with a copy of the evi-
dence of such witnesses.
CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1908. 41
10. The accused may at any time before his trial give to the Clerk of
Witnesses for defence, ^ Crown °* °thelr °ffi.C?P aS auforesai<* a lis* of
the persons whom he wishes to be summoned to
give evidence on his trial.
11. (1) All persons sent for trial to the High Court under this Acb
Procedure in High Court. «h»11 be *ri?d> * TSP6oial Bench °f the Courfc
composed of three Judges.
(2) No trial before the Special Bench shall be by jury.
(3) Where there is a difference of opinion among the Judges forming
the Special Bench, the decision shall be in accordance with the opinion of
the majority of those Judges.
12. No person who has been remanded to custody in the course of pro-
Bail> ceedings under this Act shall be released on bail
under the provisions of section 497 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1898, if there appear to be sufficient grounds for
further inquiry into the guilt of such person.
13. Notwithstanding anything contained in section 33 of the Indian
Special rale of evidence, Evidence Act, 1872, the _ evidence of any witness
taken by a Magistrate in proceedings to which
this Part applies shall be treated as evidence before the High Court if the
witness is dead or cannot be produced and if the Sigh Court has reason to
believe that his death or absence has been caused in the interests of the
accused.
14. (/) The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, shall
Procedure n0^ aPPty to proceedings taken under this Part
in so far as they are inconsistent with the special
procedure prescribed in this Part.
(#) When holding a trial under section II, the Special Bench shall
apply the provisions of Chapter XXIII of the said Code with such
modifications as may appear necessary to adapt those provisions to the
case of a trial before the High Court without a jury.
PART II.
UNLAWFUL ASSOCIATIONS.
Definitions, 15. In this Part —
(1) " Association " means any combination or body of persons, whether
the name be known by any distinctive name or not ; and
(£} "unlawful association" means an association —
(a) which encourages or aids persons to commit acts of violence or in-
timidation or of which the members habitually commit such
acts, or
(b) which has been declared to be unlawful by the Governor Gene-
ral in Council under the powers hereby conferred.
16. If the G )venior-General in Council is of opinion that any association
Power to declare association interferes or has for its object interference with
unlawful, the administration of the law or with the
maintenance ot law and order, or that it constitutes a danger ta the public
peace, the Governor General in Council may, by notification in the official
Gazette, declare such association to be unlawful.
42 CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1908.
17. (1) Whoever is a member of an unlawful association, or takes
Penalties Par^ *n meetiDg8 °f anJ suc^ association, or
contributes or receives or solicits any contribu-
tion for the purpose of any such association, or in any way assists the
operations of any such association, shall be punished with imprisonment
for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.
(2) Whoever manages or assists in the management of an unlawful
association, or promotes or assists in promoting a meeting of any such
association, or of any members thereof as such members, shall be punished
with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with
fine, or with both*
18. An association shall not be deemed to have ceased to exist by
reason only of any formal act of dissolution or
>f association Qf
so long as any actual combination for the purposes of such association
continues between any members thereof.
THE SCHEDULE.
(See section 3.)
1. Any offence under the following sections of the Indian Penal Code,
namely : —
Chapter VI, sections 121, 121 A, 122, 123 and 124.
Chapter VII, sections 131 and 132.
Chapter VIII, section 148.
Chapter XVI, sections 302, 304, 307, 308, 326 327, 329, 332, 333,
363, 364, 365 and 368.
Chapter XVII, sections 385, 386, 387, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397,
398, 399, 400, 401, 402. 431, 435, 436, 437, 438, 440, 454, 455,
457, 458, 459 and 460.
Chapter XXII, section 506.
2. Any offence under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, and
3. Any attempt to commit or any abetment of any of the above
offences.
Statement of Objects and Reasons.
Recent events have demonstrated that it is expedient to provide for
the more speedy trial oi anarchical offences, and for the suppiession of
associations dangerous to the public peace. This Bill has been prepared to
meet these objects. Part 1 provides for the trial of certain offences by a
Bench of three Judges of the High Court. In the procedure there is no
formal commitment, but the case is prepared for trial by an ex-parte inquiry
before a magistrate, and the trial is without jury. Two special provisions
are made applicable to cases to which the Bill will apply. The first is that
bail shall be refused 30 long as there is reasonable ground for further inquiry
into the guilt of the accused. The second is that the evidence of witnesses
who have been examined by the magistrate may be admitted at the trial if
the witness is dead or cannot be produced, and the High Court has reason
to believe that his death or absence was caused in the interests of the
accused.
CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1908. 43
Part II provides for the suppression of unlawful associations. Such
persons as are members of or in any way assist an association which encou-
rages or aids the commitment .of acts of violence or intimidation, or of
which the members habitually commit such acts, are made liable to punish-
ment, and a severer punishment is provided for persons managing or
promoting such associations. Farther the Governor-General in Council is
empowered to declare certain associations to be unlawful, and the same
penalties are provided for persons who after this declaration maintain their
connection with them.
The Bill extends in the first instance to the provinces of Bengal
and Eastern Bengal and Assam, and the Governor-General in Council
is empowered to extend it to other provinces.
The 9th December 190S. H. ADAMSON.
Notes.
(1)^ The power of the High Court to grant bail to an accused person under s. 4fl8 of Cr.
Procedure Code is untouched by the provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Act
But in exercising its discretionary power under that section, the High Court will take into
consideration the terms of s. 12 of the Act, whereby the power of Courts other than the
High Court and the Sessions Court, of releasing the accused on bail, given by s. 497, Cr,
Pro, Code have been made subject to the proviso that no person remanded to custody in the
course of proceedings under the Act phall be released on bail, if there appear to be sufficient
grounds for inquiry into his guilt. Taking cognizance of an offence does not involve any
formal action of any kind, as soon as a Magistrate, as such, applies his mind to the
suspected commission of an offence.
Reported in 14 C. W N. 512.
(2), Where the provisions of Part I of the Act have been applied to proceedings
before a Magistrate in respect of an offence, the Sessions Judge ceases to have jurisdiction to
grant bail under s. 498, Cr. Pro. Code, the exercise of such jurisdiction being inconsistent
with the special procedure prescribed in the said Part. The proper Court to apply to for
bail in such a case is the High Court, whose power to admit to bail is not affected by the Act,
The District Magistrate acted improperly in not sending the records to the Sessions J udge
when he called for them, 14 5.5
(3), A confession by a conspirator made to a Magistrate after arrest disclosing the existance
of a conspiracy, its objects ani the names of its members, is not admissible under s, 10 of the
Evidence Act, against the co -conspirators jointly tried with him, but only under s. 30 of the
Act, S. 10 is intended to make as evidence communications between different conspirators
while the conspiracy is going on with reference to the carrying out of the conspiracy. The
confession of a co-accused was not intended to be put on the same footing as a communica-
tion passing between conspirators or between conspirators and other persons with reference
to the conspiracy. The evidentiary value of such a confession under s. 30, is not higher
than that of the statement of an accomplice, and it cannot be acted upon unless corrobo-
rated by independent testimony implicating the accused in the design with which they are
charged. Emperor v. Abani Bhusan Chuckerbutty. (1 910.) [Pallichitra Case].
38Calc. 169.
(4), It would be a dangerous principle to adopt to regard a verdict of not guilty as not
fully establishing the innocence of the person to whom it relates. R. V. Plummer [1902]
2 K. B. 339, relied on, One was charged with conspiracy to wage war against the King
under s. 121 A, Indian Penal Code, and acquitted. In a subsequent trial of others on aa
indentical charge, it was held that what he said or did cannot be admitted in evidence at
such trial in view of his acquittal. Emperor v. Nonigopal Gupta [1910],
Reported in 15 C. W. N. 646.
(5). Where the accused were charged with conspiracy with persons "known and
unknown" -.—Held, that if the persons were "known", they should be named in the charge.
Where a person has been tried for a specific offence and acquitted, and he is subsequently
charged with conspiracy of which that offecce is alleged to form a part :— Held, that an acquittal
conclusive; and it would be a very dangerous principle to regard a judgment of not guilty
as not fully establishing the innocence of the person to whom it relates. Eex V. Plummer [190:2]
2 K, B. 339, referred to. The course of not making completed offences the subject of a
44 CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1908.
separate trial but of throwing them into a case of conspiracy, though lawful, is not to be com-
mended. Before the testimony of an accomplice can be acted on, it must be corroborated iu
material particulars. There must be corroboration not only as to the crime, but also as to the
identity of each one of the accused. This is no technical rule, but one founded on long judi-
cial experience. For a conspiracy to wage war, no act or illegal omission is necessary; the
agreement of two or more will -suffice. While admissions, which include confessions, are by
section 21 of the Evidence Act, 1872, declared relevant and may be proved as against the
persons making them, all that section 30 of the Evidence Act provides is that the Court
may take them into consideration as against other persons.
This distinction of language is significant, and shows that the Court can only treat a
confession as lending assurance to other evidence against a co-accused, and a conviction on
the confession of a co-accused alone would be bad in law. Moreover, under section 30, that
only can be taken into consideration which is a confession in the true sense of the term,
so that to place any reliance on a retracted confession against a co-accused would be most
unsafe. Yasin v. Emperor I. L. R 28 Cal 689 referred to. Verification proceedings do not
add any value to an approver's evidence or to confessions, and cannot be regarded as ' corrobo-
ration. A discharge is not binding on the Court, for it is not equivalent to an acquittal.
Still a discharge means that the Magistrate, after taking the evidence found that there were
not sufficient grounds for committing the accused for trial. A retracted confession cannot
ordinarily take the place of legal proof. Where several persons are charged with the same
conspiracy, it is a legal impossibility that some should be found guilty of one conspiracy and
some of another, and any accused not shown to be a member of that conspiracy is entitled
to demand an acquittal.
559, Emperor v. Lalit Mohan Chuckerbutty and others (1911,) 38 Calc.
THE 1NDIN PRESS ACT, 1910- 45
STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS.
PUBLISHED WITH THE BILL.
The continued recurrence of murderous outrages has shown that the
measures which have hitherto been taken to deal with anarchy and
sedition require strengthening and that the real source of the evil has not
as yet been touched. Since 1907, the policy of the Government has been
directed to the steady enforcement of the ordinary law against sedition.
Prosecutions have invariably proved successful but have produced no
permanent improvement in the tone of the Press, a certain section of
which has continued, both by openly seditious writing and by suggestion
and veiled incitement, to inculcate hostility to British rule. There is no
lack of evidence that the series of crimes which preceded and have followed
the passing of Act VII of 1908 is directly traceable to these influences, to
which the authors of the outrages — young men of the educated middle
class — are peculiarly susceptible. This propaganda has been carried on
not only by means of newspapers but by leaflets, pamphlets and the like,
rendering it necessary to assume control over printing-presses as well as
newspapers.
2. The main, divisions of the Bill which has been prepared with this
object are —
(I) Control over presses and means of publication; (IT) control over
publishers ; (III) control over the importation into British India and the
transmission by the post of objectionable matter ; (IV) the suppression of
seditious or objectionable newspapers, books or other documents wherever
found.
3. I. The first of these objects it is sought to attain as follows : —
(1) all proprietors of printing-presses making a declaration for the
first time under section 4 of the Press and Registration of
Books Act, 1867, will be required to give security, which may,
however, be dispensed with by the Magistrate at his discre-
tion, The proprietors of existing presses will be required to
give security only if and when they are guilty of printing
objectionable matter of the description to which the Acfc
applies ;
(2) Local Governments may declare such security forfeit where it
appears to them that the press has been used for printing or
publishing objectionable matter.
The Bill defines such matter as that calculated —
(a) to incite to murder, to anarchical outrage by means of
explosives, or to acts of violence ;
(b) to tamper with the loyalty of the Army or Navy ;
(c) to excite racial class or religious animosities, or hatred
or contempt of the Government of British India or of
any Native State or Prince ;
(d) to incite to criminal intimidation ;
(e) to incite to interference with the administration of the
law or with the maintenance of law and order ;
(/) to intimidate public servants by threat of injury to them
or to those in whom they are interested.
46 THES INDIAN PRESS ACT, 1 910
The declaration of forfeiture operates to annul the declaration made
under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867.
When the initial security so deposited has thus been forfeited, the
deposit of further security in a larger sura is required before a fresh decla-
ration can be made under section 4 of the Press and Registration of Books
Act of 1867, and if thereafter the press is again used for printing or
publishing objectionable matter the further security deposited and the
press itself may be declared forfeit.
II. Control over publishers of newspapers, the second main object of
the Bill, is provided for in a similar manner. The keeping of a printing-
press and the publishing of a newspaper without depositing security when
required are punishable with the penalties prescribed for failure to make
the declarations required by sections 4 and 5 of the Press and Registration
of Books Act, 1867.
III. The more efficient control over the importation and transmission
by post of objectionable matter of the kind described in the Bill is given
by empowering the customs and post office authorities to detain and
examine packages suspected of containing such matter, and to submit
them for the orders of the Local Government. The Bill further prohibits
the transmission by post of any newspaper in respect of which a declaration
has not been made under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867,
and security deposited as required under this Bill, and empowers postal
officials to open and deliver to the proper authorities articles in the course
of transmission which are suspected of containing such newspapers.
IV. The fourth object of the Bill is attained by authorizing the Local
Government to declare forfeit any newspaper, book or other document
which appears to it to contain matter of the prohibited description, and
upon such a declaration the Bill empowers the police to seize such articles
and to search for the same.
In each case the Local Government is the authority authorized to
declare forfeiture, but a check is imposed upon the exercise of this power
in that the Bill provides for an application, within two month* of the date
of such declaration to a special bench of three Judges of the fJigh Court,
on the question of fact whether the matter objected to is or is not of the
description defined in the Bill. If the High Court finds that it is not of
that description, it must cancel the order of forfeiture.
All other legal proceedings for action taken under the Bill are barred.
Subsidiary matters provided for in the Bill are the search for and seizure
under special warrant of the Magistrate of property declared forfeit under
the Bill ; for the submission by the printer of every newspaper to such
officer as the Local Government may direct of two copies of each issue
of his paper op pain of a penalty of Rs 50 for each default; the return of
security deposited by a printer or a publisher, when such person ceases to
keep a printing-press or, being a publisher, makes a declaration under
section 8 of the Press and Registration of Books Act of 1867 ; and lastly the
saving of prosecutions under any other law.
The 3rd February 1910. H. H. RISLEY.
The following report of the Select Committee on the Bill to provide for
the better control of the Press, was presented to the Council of the
THE INDIAN PBGSS ACT, 1910, 47
Governor-General of India for the purpose of making Laws and Regula-
tions on the 8th February, 1910 : —
We, the undersigned, Members of the Select Committee to which the
Bill to provide for the control of the Press was referred, have considered
the Bill and have now the honour to submit this our report, with the Bill
as amended by UP annexed thereto.
2. Clause #.— We have considered it necessary to insert a special
definition of " High Court " as the definition in s. 3(24) of the General
clauses Act, 1897, is not suitable for the provinces of Coorg and Ajmere-
Merwara where the Chief Commissioner who is the Local Government is
also the High Court. We have therefore provided that in the case of these
two provinces the " High Court " shall mean the High Court at Madras
and the High Court for the North- Western Provinces, respectively.
3. Clause 3 (/) and 8 (/). — In the case of a keeper of a press or pub-
lisher starting business after the commencement of this Act we have re-
duced the maximum amount of the security from Rs, 5,000 to Rs. 2,000
as we think that the larger amount might prove excessive in the case of
well-intentioned printers and publishers of small means.
4. Clause 4 (/). — In sub-clause (c.) we have substituted the words "the
administration of justice in British India " for the words <l any lawful
authority" and we have struck out from this sub-clause the words
" or antipathy between members of different races, castes, classes, religions
or sects " and inserted in it words to make it include the bringing into
hatred or contempt of any clas>i or section of His Majesty's subjects in
British India, as we are disposed to think that the clause as thus altered
will be sufficient to carry out the purpose in view.
5. Clauses 3, 5 8, and 10. — We have expressly provided that the
deposit required under the Act may be made either in money or the equi-
valent thereof in securities of the Government of India.
6. Clause 14- — We have slightly modified this clause so as to make it
clear that ifc applies only to newspapers printed and published in British
India.
7. Clause 15*— This clause as introduced proposed to empower postal
officers to open any article in course of transit by post. We do not
consider it necessary that postal officers should have this power. Nor do we
think that they should -have power to detain letters or parcels. We have
therefore modified this clause by providing that such officers should have
power only to detain articles other than letters Or parcels and deliver them
to such officer as the Local Government may appoint in this behalf to be
disposed of in such manner as the Local Government may direct.
Clauses IS and 19. — We have considered it necessary to provide for
cases where the Special Bench may consist of two Judges who may be
divided in opinion ; we have provided that in such cases the order of
forfeiture made by the Local Government shall stand.
9. The other alterations which we have made in the Bill are of a formal
nature and call for no special remarks. »
10 The Bill was published in the Gazette of India in English on the
5th February, 1910.
48 THE INDIAN PRESS ACT, 1910,
11. We think that the measure bas not been so altered as to require
re-publication and we recommend that it be passed as now amended.
Sd. H. H. Risley ; S. P. Sinha ; H. A. Stuart ; G. H. B. Kenrick ;
H. 0. Quin ; P. C. Lyon ; G. K. Gokhale ; Bijay Chand Mahtab ; Zulfikar AH
Khan ; R. N. Mudholkar ; 0. W. N. Graham.
NOTE OF DISSKNT.
We sign the Report subject to the following minute of dissent. We
think that the existing law is sufficient to punish actual sedition as also to
deal effectively with incitements to violence. But in view of the excep-
tional situation in several parts of the country, we are constrained to admit
the necessity of strengthening the hands of the executive in preventing
the spread of seditious teachings. And we assent, though not without
great reluctance, to the principle of providing a certain amount of execu-
tive control at initial stages over printing-presses and newspapers to
prevent serious abuses of the liberty of the Press. We cannot shut our
eyes to the risks which must accompany such a provision. But it is a
choice between two evils, and we accept what we consider to be the lesser
evil of the two. We, however, think that such exceptional legislation should
not form part of the permanent Statute-book of the country, and we strongly
urge that the measure should remain in force for a limited period only,
say, three years. Moreover, even conceding the principle mentioned
above for preventive purposes, we consider that some of the provisions
of the'proposed Bill are far too drastic and go beyond the requirement
of the situation. In particular we urge that two provisions should
be modified. The Bill lays down that the keeper of every new printing-
press and the publisher of every new newspaper shall, at the time of
making a declaration under the Press and Registration of Books Act of
1867, ordinarily deposit a security, fehe Magistrate being empowered to
dispense in exceptional cases with the deposit of such security. We think
that this should be reversed-that ordinarily no security should be required,
but the Magistrate should be empowered to demand the deposit of a security
in cases in which in his opinion there are reasonable grounds to believe
that the press or the newspaper is intended or is likely to be used, for any
of the purposes described in section 4, sub-section (1). This will prevent an
unnecessary financial burden (which in the case of small concerns might
prove a serious burden) b^ing imposed on well-intentioned printers and
publishers and will at the same time meet the case of old offenders reappear-
ing under new names or new garbs. We also think that where a Local
Government has issued a notice of forfeiture of security, the annulment of
the declaration should not take place till after the application to the High
Court, if made, has been decided.
Sd. G. K. GOKHALE ; R. N. MUDHOLKAR.
I regret I cannot join with the majority of my colleagues in the re-
commendation that the Bill as amended should be passed. In my humble
opinion the important nature of the legisl ttlon proposed demands that both
the members of this Council and the public should have more time to
consider the Bill and to express their opinions regarding it. The object of
THE INDIAN PRESS ACT, 1910. 49
the Bill is to prevent Printing-presses and newspapers being used to pro-
mote seditious or other criminal purposes. Section 108 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure (Act v of 1898) empowers a Chief Presidency or a
District- Magistrate, with the previous sanction of the Governor-General
iu Council or the Local Government, to require any editor, printer, proprietor •
or publisher of any publication registered under, or printed or published
in confirmity with the rules laid down in the Press and Eegistration of
Books Acts, 1867, who disseminates or attempts to disseminate or in any
way abets the dissemination of any seditious matter, that is to say any
matter, the publication of which is punishable under section 124 A of the
Indian Penal Code, or any matter concerning a judge which amounts to
criminal intimidation or defamation under the Penal Code, to show cause
why he should not be ordered to execute a bond with or without sureties
for his good behaviour. Act vii of 1908 has made stronger provision for
the prevention of incitements to murder and to other offences in newspapers,
which include an attachment and forfeiture of the press at which the
offending matter may be published.
If notwithstanding these enactments, deplorable circumstances have come
to exist in some parts of the country and it has become necessary that the
existing provisions of the law relating to printing presses and newspapers
should be strengthened to enable the Government to more effectively prevent
them from being used to promote sedition or other crime, it is our duty
to support and I am fully prepared to support the provisions of the Bill,
which relate to the demand of security, provided it is asked for from
printers or publishers who have offended against the law relating to the
State, and in view of the present state of the country even from persons in
whose case the Magistrate may have reasonable grounds for believing that
they are likely to use the press or the newspaper which they wish to start
for the wicked purpose of fostering sedition or other crime. This object
could to my mind be gained by amending the Criminal Procedure Code.
But so far as the Bill seeks to do this, I am prepared to support it But
I regret I do not see any justification for the important departure which the
Bill seeks to make in laying down that the order demanding security,
or forfeiting it, or forfeiting the printing press, etc., of an offending printer
or publisher, shall be made, not as heretofore, both under section 108 of the
Criminal Procedure Code, and under the Newpapers (Incitements to
Offences) Act by the Magistrate after giving an opportunity to the person
against whom the order is to be made, but by the Local Government,
upon a mere perusal of the matter which he may have published. I think
that when a Local Government is of opinion that a security should
be demanded from the keeper of a press or the publisher of a newspaper, it
should direct the Magistrate within whose jurisdiction the press is situated
or the paper is published, to call on such keeper or publisher to show cause
why he should not be ordered to deposit such security within the limits
prescribed by the Bill, as the Magistrate may think fit to fix, and it should
be left to the said Magistrate upon good cause not being shown to order
the security to be deposited. The power to declare a security forfeited
should similarly be left to the Magistrate.
The order of the Magistrate will in either case be a judicial order, and
an appeal should be permitted to the High Court as is provided under Act
VII of 1908. But even if section 17 of the Bill is allowed to stand as it is
providing for an application to the High Court to revise an order passed
50 THE INDIAN PRESS ACT, 1910.
for forfeiture of security, — a similar provision for revision should be made
in regard to an order for deposit of security also ; — it will preserve what
exists at present of an entirely reasonable separation between Judicial and
Executive functions, and will give a greater assurance to the general public
of a fair consideration of the merits of the order, when it is the order of
a Magistrate which is brought before a High Court for a revision, than
when it is an order passed by a Local Government. The principle involved
in the departure which the Bill makes from the laws enacted by the
Government of India for over half a century, is of great importance. Ifc
raises a political question, to quote the weighty words of Mr. Gladstone,
uttered in the House of Commons in connection with the Vernacular Press
Act of 1878, " of the utmost delicacy, namely, whether it is wise for the
Government to take into its own hands, and out of the established
legal jurisdiction, the power of determining what writing is seditious, and
what is not ". If the amendment I have suggested is accepted, this depar-
ture will be avoided and the powers which the Bill gives to the Govern-
ment for exercising a more effective control over the Press will not in the
least be diminished.
I think that the provisions of the Bill are in some other respects, also
wider and more drastic than they need be, but they are covered by the
amendments I propose to put forward, and I need not therefore note them
in detail here.
I fear that if the Bill is passed as it stands at present it is likely to
affect injuriously the perfectly legitimate liberty of expression of the
unexceptionable section of the Press also, and if this should appear, it will
be a misfortune both for the people and the Government. The Bill is an
exceptionable measure, and its operation should, at any rate, not be extend-
ed to all parts of the country at once but should be confined to those
parts where a necessity for it may be found to exist. Its duration also
should be confined to a period of three years.
The 7th February, 1910. MAD AN MOHAN MALA VIYA.
. _ j
ACT No. I OF 1910.
PASSED BY THE GOVERNOR GENERAL OF INDIA IN COUNCIL.
(Received the assent of the Governor General on the 9th February 19 IG),
An Act to provide for the better control of the Press.
Whereas it is necessary to provide for the better control of the Press ;
It is hereby enacted as follows : —
1. (1} This Act may be called the Lidian
Short title and extent. ~ . v ,' . „ . n J
Press Act, 1910.
(2) It extends to the whole of British India, inclusive of British
Baluchistan, the Santhal Parganas and the Pargana of Spiti.
2. In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or
Definitions. context, —
(a) " book " includes every volume, part or division of a volume, and
pamphlet, in any language, and every sheet of music, map,
chart or plan separately printed or lithographed ;.
THE INDIAN PRESS ACT, 1910. 51
(b) " document" includes also any painting, drawing or photograph
or other visible representation :
(c) " High Court " means the Highest Civil Court of Appeal for any
local area except in the case of the provinces of Ajmer-Merwani
and Coorg where it means the High Court of Judicature
for the North- Western Provinces and the High Court of
Judicature at Madras respectively :
(d) " Magistrate v means a District Magistrate or Chief Presidency
Magistrate :
(e) li newspaper " means any periodical work containing public
news : and
(/) " printing-press " includes all engines, machinery, types, litho-
graphic stones, implements, utensils and other plant or
materials used for the purpose of printing.
3. (/) Every person keeping a printing-press who is required to make
Deposit of security by a declaration under section 4 of the Press and
keepers of printing-presses. Registration of Books Act, 1 867, shall at the
time of making the same, deposit with the Magistrate before whom the
declaration is made security to such an amount, not being less than five
hundred or more than two thousand rupees, as the Magistrate may in each
case think fit to require, in money or the equivalent thereof in securities
of the Government of India :
Provided that the Magistrate may, if he thinks fit, for special reasons to
be recorded by him, dispense with the deposit of any security or may from
time to time cancel or vary any order under this sub-section.
(2) Whenever it appears to the Local Government that any printing-
press kept in any place in the territories under its administration, m
respect of which a declaration was made prior to the commencement of this
Act under section 4 of the Press and Registration of Rooks Act, 1867, is
used for any of the purposes described in section 4, sub-section (1), the
Local Government may, by notice in writing, require the keeper of such
press to deposit with the Magistrate within whose jurisdiction the pre&s
is situated security to such an amount, not being less than five hundred
or more than five thousand rupees, as the Local Gevernment may think
fit to require, in money or the equivalent thereof in securities of the
Government of India,
4. (/) Whenever it appears to the Local Government that any printing-
Power to declare security press in respect of which any security has been
forfeited in certain cases. deposited as required by section 3 is used for
the purpose of printing or publishing any newspaper, book or other docu-
ment containing any words, signs or visible representations which are
likely or may have a tendency, directly or indirectly, whether by inference,
suggestion, allusion, metaphor, implication or otherwise —
(a) to incite to murder or to any offence under the Explosive Subs-
tances Act, 1908, or to any act of violence, or
(6) to seduce any officer, soldier or sailor in the Army or Navy of
His Majesty from his allegiance or his duty, or
52 THE INDIAN PRESS ACT, 1910.
(c) to bring into hatred or contempt His Majesty or the Government
established by law in British India or the administration of
justice in British India or any Native Prince or Chief under tl e
suzerainty of His Majesty, or any class or section of His Majesty's
subjects in British India, or to excite disaffection towards His
Majesty or the said Government or any such Prince or Chief or
(d) to put any person in fear or to cause annoyance to him and
thereby induce him to deliver to any person any property or
valuable security, or to do any act which he is not legally bound
to do, or to omit to do any act which he is legally entitled to
do, or
(e) to encourage or incite any person to interfere with the administra-
tion of the law or with the maintenance of law and order, or »
(/) to convey any threat of injury to a public servant, or to any person
in whom that public servant is believed to be interested, with a
view to inducing that public servant to do any act or to forbear
or. delay to do any act connected with the exercise of his public
functions,
the Local Government may, by notice in writing to the keeper of such
printing-press, stating or describing the words, signs, or visible repre-
sentations which in its opinion are of the nature described above, declare the
security deposited in respect of such press and all copies of such
newspaper, book or other document wherever found to be forfeited to His
Majesty.
Explanation I. — In clause (c) the expression " disaffection " includes
disloyalty and all feelings of enmity.
Explanation II. — Comments expressing disapproval of the measures
of the Government or of any such Native Prince or Chief as aforesaid with
a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means, or of the administrative
or other action of the Government or of any such Native Prince or Chief or
of the administration of justice in British India without exciting or attempt-
ing to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection do not come within the
scope of clause (c).
(2) After the expiry of ten days from the date of the issue of a notice
under sub-section (I), the declaration made in respect of such press under
section 4 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, shall be
deemed to be annulled.
5. Where the security given in respect of any press has been declared
forfeited under section 4, every person making
Deposit of further seounty. ft fregh dedaration in regpect o/ such press und£
section 4 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, ] 867, shall deposit
with the Magistrate before whom such declaration is made security to such
amount, not being less than one thousand or more then ten thousand
rupees, as the Magistrate may think fit to require, in money or the
equivalent thereof in securities of the Government of India.
6. If after such further security has been deposited the printing-press
Power to declare further is a?ain used for the Purpose of printing or
security, printing-press and publishing any newspaper, book or other docu-
pubiications forfeited. ment containing any words, signs or visible
representations which in the opinion of the Local Government are of the
THE INDIAN PBESS AC'I, 1910. 53
nature described in section 4, sub-section (1), the Local Government may,
by notice in writing to the keeper of such printing-press, stating or
describing such words, signs or visible representations, declare —
(a) the further security so deposited,
(&) the printing press used for the purpose of printing or publishing
such newspaper, book or other document, or found in or upon the
premises where such newspaper, book or other document is, or
at the time of printing the matter complained of was, printed,
and
(c) all copies of such, newspaper, book or other document wherever
found,
to be forfeited to His Majesty.
7. (I) Where any printing-press is or any copies of any newspaper,
book or other document are declared forfeited
Issue of search-warraut. , . ., . . , ,, . A . ., T , „
to his Majesty under this Act, the Local Govern-
ment may direct any Magistrate to issue a warrant empowering any police-
officer, not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector, to seize and detain any
property ordered to be forfeited and to enter upon and search for such
property in any premises —
(i) where any such property may be or may be reasonably suspected
to be, or
(ii) where any copy of such newspaper, book or other document is
kept for sale, distribution, publication or public exhibition or reasonably
suspected to be so kept.
(2) Every warrant issued under this section shall, so far as relates to a
search, be executed in manner provided for the execution of search-warrants
under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
8. ^) Every publisher of a newspaper who is required to make a dec-
laration under section 5 of the Press and Regis-
tration of Books Act' J 86J' shall> at the "me of
making the same, deposit with the Magistrate
before whom the declaration is made security to such an amount, not being
less than five hundred or more than two thousand rupees, as the Magistrate
may in each case think fit to require, in money or the equivalent thereof
in securities of the Government of India ;
Provided that if the person registered under the said Act as printer of
the newspaper is also registered as the keeper of the presss where the
newspaper is printed, the publisher shall not be required to deposit security
so long as such registration is in force :
Provided further that the Magistrate may, if he thinks fit, for special
reasons to be recorded by him, dispense with the deposit of any security
or may from time to time cancel or vary any order under this sub-section.
(2) Whenever it appears to the Local Government that a newspaper
published within its territories, in respect of which a declaration was made
by the publisher thereof prior to the commencement of this Act, under
section 5 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, contains any
words, signs or visible representations of the nature described in section 4
sub-section (1), the Local Government may, by notice in writing, require
the publisher to deposit with the Magistrate, within whose jurisdiction the
newspaper is published security to such an amount, not being less than five
54 THE INIMAN PRESS ACT, 1910.
hundred or more than five thousand rupees, as the Local Government may
think fit to require, in money or the equivalent thereof in securities of the
"Government of India.
9. (1) If any newspaper in respect of which any security has been de-
posited as required by section 8 contains any
Power to declare security . . M , J , • , • i .
iorfeited in certain cases. ' words» S1gns or vlslble representations which in
the opinion of the Local Government are of the
mature described in section 4, sub-section ( /), the Local Government may,
by notice in writing to the publisher of such newspaper, stating or describ-
ing such words, signs or visible representations, declare such security and
all -copies of such newspaper, wherever found, to be forfeited to His
Majesty.
(2) After the expiry of ten days from the date of the issue of a notice
under sub-section (1), the declaration made by the publisher of such
newspaper under section 5 of the Press and Kegistration of Books Act, 1867,
shall be deemed to be annulled.
10. Where the security given in respect of any newspaper is declared
forfeited, any person making a fresh declaration
Depos,t of farther soounty. ^^ ^.^ | Qf the ^ » and Eegistration of
Books Act, 1867. as publisher of such newspaper,
or any other newspaper which is the same in substance as the
said newspaper, shall deposit with the Magistrate before whom the decla-
ration is made security to such amount, not being less then one thousand
or more than ten thousand rupees, as the Magistrate may think fit to
require, in money or the equivalent thereof in securities of the Government
of India,
1 1 . If after such further security has been deposited the newspaper
again contains any words, signs or visible repre-
Power to declare further scntations which in the opinion of the Local Gov-
secunty and newspapers e ,, -, ., -, .
forfeited. ernment are of the nature described in section
4, sub-section (1), the Local Government may,
by notice in writing to the publisher of such newspaper, stating or describ-
ing such words, signs or visible representations, declare —
(a) the further security so deposited, and
(6) all copies of such newspaper wherever found, to be forfeited to His
Majesty.
12. (1) Where any newspaper, book or other document wherever
, . printed appears to the Local Government to
Power to declare certain . . . . ., ,
publications forfeited and to contain any words, signs or visible representa-
issuo search-warrants for tions of the nature described in section 4, sub-
same- section (I), the Local Government may, by
notification in the local official Gazette, stating the grounds of its opinion,
declare such newspaper, book or other document to be forfeited to His
Majesty, and thereupon any police-officer may seize the same wherever
found, and any Magistrate may by warrant authorise any police-officer nob
below the rank of Sub-Inspector to enter upon and search for the same in
any premises where the newspaper, book or other document may be or may
be reasonably suspected to be.
(£) Every warrant issued under this section «shall, so far as relates to a
search, be executed in manner provided for the execution of search-warrants
under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
THE INDIAN PRESS ACT, 1910'. 55
13. The Chief Customs-officer or other officer authorized by the Local
Power to detain packages Government in this behalf may detain any
containing certain publications package brought, whether by land or sea, into
when imported into British British India which he suspects to contain any
newspapers, books or other documents of the
nature described in section 4, sub-section (1), and shall forthwith forward
copies of any newspapers, books or other documents found therein to such
officer as the Local Government may appoint in this behalf to be disposed
of in such manner as the Local Government may direct.
14. No newspaper printed and pubished in British India shall be trans-
mitted by post unless the printer and publisher
Prohibition of transmission have made ft declaration under section 5 of the
by post of certain newspapers, n . ,, . _ T, '
Press and Itegi stratum or Books Act, 186 /, and
the publisher has deposited security when so required under this Act.
15. Any officer in charge of a post-office or authorised by the Post-
Power to detain articles Master General- in this behalf may detain any
being transmitted by post. article other than a letter or parcel in course of
transmission by post, which he suspects to contain —
(a) any newspaper, book or other document containing words, signs or
visible representations of the nature described in section 4, sub-
section (I), or
(6) any newspaper in respect of which the declaration required by sec-
tion 5 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, has not
been made, or the security required by this Act has not been
deposited by the publisher thereof,
and shall deliver all such articles to such officer as the Local Government
may appoint in this behalf to be disposed of in such manner as the Local Gov-
ernment may direct.
16. (I) The printer of every newspaper in British India shall deliver at
Copies of newspapers print- such place and to such officer as the Local Govern-
ed in British India to be deli- ment may, by notification in the local official
,'overnment. Gazette? direct( and free of expense to the Govern-
ment, two copies of each issue of such newspaper as soon as it is published.
(#) If any printer of any such newspaper neglects to deliver copies of the
same in compliance with sub-section (1), he shall, on the complaint of the
officer to whom the copies should have been delivered or of any person autho-
rised bj that officer in this behalf, be punlishable on conviction by a Magis-
trate having jurisdiction in the place where the newspaper was printed with
fine which may extend to fifty rupees for every default.
17. Any person having an interest in any property in respect of which
Application /to High Court an order of forfeiture has been made uuder section
to set aside order of forfei- 4^ 9, II or 12 may, within two months from
the date of such order, apply to the High Court
to set aside such order on the ground that the newspaper, book or other do-
cument in respect of which the order was made did not contain any words,
signs or visible representations of the nature described in section 4, sub-sec-
tion (/).
18. Every such application shall be heard and determined by a Special
Homing by Special Bench. ?ench of the High Court composed of three
Judges, or where the High Court consists of less
than three Judges, of all the Judges.
56 THE INDIAN PRESS ACT, 1910.
19. (/) If it appears to the Special Bench that the words, signs or visi-
Orderof Special Bench set- ble representations contained in the newspaper,
ting aside forfeiture. book or other document in respect of which the
order in question was made were not of the nature described in section
4, sub-section (1), the Special Bench shall set aside the order of forfeiture.
(2) Where there is a difference of opinion among the Judges forming
the Special Bench, the decision shall be in accordance with the opinion of
the majority (if any) of those Judges.
(3) Where there is no such majority which concurs in setting aside the
order in question, such order shall stand.'
20. On the hearing of any such application with reference to any news-
Evidence to prove nature paper, any copy of such newspaper published
or tendency of newspapers. after commencement of this Act may be given in
evidence in aid of the pi oof of the nature or tendency of the words, signs or
visible representations contained in such newspaper which are alleged to be
of the nature described in section 4, sub-section (/).
21. Every High Court shall, as soon as conveniently may be, frame rules
to regulate the procedure in the case of such ap-
Procedure in High Court. , . p. , , , e , , r , ,
plications, the amount of the cost thereof and the
execution of orders passed thereon, and until such rules are framed the
practice of such Court in proceedings other than suits and appeals shall
apply, so far as may be practicable, to such applications.
22. Every declaration of forfeiture purporting to be made under this
. , , Act shall, as against all persons, be conclusive evi-
e ' dence that the forfeiture therein referred to has
taken place, and no proceeding purporting to be taken under this Act shall
be called in question by any Court, except the High Court on such appli-
cation as aforesaid, and no civil or criminal proceeding, except as provided
by this Act, shall be instituted against any person for anything done or in
good faith intended to be done under this Act.
23. (1) Whoever keeps in his possession a press for the printing of books
Penalty for'keeping press or or papers without making a deposit under section
publishing newspaper without 35 or section, when required so to do, shall on
making deposit. conviction by a Magistrate be liable to the penal-
ty to which he would be liable if he had failed to make the declaration pres-
cribed by section 5 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867.
24. Where any psrson has deposited any security under this Act and
ceases to keep the press in respect of which such
y **urity was deposited, or, being a publisher,
makes a declaration under section 8 of the Press
and Registration of Books Act, 1867, he may apply to the Magistrate within
whose jurisdiction such press is situate for the return of the said security;
and thereupon such security shall, upon proof to the satisfaction of the
Magistrate and subject to the provisions hereinbefore contained, be returned
to such person.
25. Every notice under this Act shall be sent to a Magistrate, who shall
cause it to be served in the manner provided for
Service of notices. „ /fj * n«
the service of summonses under the Code of Cri-
minal Procedure, 1898.
THE INDIAN PRESS ACT, 191 01. 57
26. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to prevent any person
from being prosecuted under any other law for
Operation of other laws not any act or omission which constitutes an offence-
against this Act.
NOTES.
(1) Sections 3, 23 (2) — The Government of Bombay, on the I3th September 1912,
issued to the applicant a notice calling upon him under s. 3 sub-s. (2), of the Indian
Press Act, 1910, to deposit with the District Magistrate of Kaira security to the
amount of Rs. 3,000 It was served on the applicant on the afternoon of the 28th
September. On the 30th idem, which was a Monday, the applicant sent off by post
letters to His Excellency the Governor and to the District Magistrate of Kaira, stating
that he had closed down the press. On the 2nd October, the applicant sold the press,
and had his declaration in- respect of the press cancelled the next day, On> the 5th
October, proceedings were taken against the applicant, under s. 23 (i) of the Act, for
keeping the press without making the deposic. He was convicted of the offence.
The applicant having applied to the High Court : Held, that no limit of time having been
given to the applicant within which to make the deposit ordered, the notice and
s. 3 of the Indian Press Act, 1910, must be construed as meaning that the deposit
ordered should be made within a reasonable time. Held, also, that the interval which
elapsed between the afternoon of the 28ih September and the 3rd October could not
be reckoned as an unreasonable time.
Emperor v. Fulchand Bapuji. 37 Bom. 555,
(2} Sections 4 (1), 20. — It is not necessary that the particular passage objected to in an?
article should be specified in the notice issued by the Local Government under s. 4 (1)
of the Indian Press Act, that an account of the voyage and adventures of the
*' Komagata Maru " and of the Budge Budge riot, so inaccurate, so misleading and so unfai
to the Government as to be likely, apart from all " comments " to excite hatred, contempt
or disaffection, does not fall within the exception embodied in explanation II of s. 4 (1)
of the Act ; that certain articles from other issues of the newspaper conceined, put
forward by the applicant, were only admissible for the purpose specified in s. 20 of the
Act, viz., " in aid of the proof of the nature and tendency " of the article of 6th October
referred to in the Government notice of forfeiture (vide (4) below) ; that although the
hatred and contempt or disaffection likely to be excited must be shown to be against
the Indian Government and not against the Canadian authorities or the Governor of Hong
Kong, the alleged conduct of those authorities was made use of in such a way as tc-
make the inaccurate and unfair statement of that conduct relevant in this case. (Feb.
1915).
Amar Singh— Petitioner, v. Crown— Respondent P, R. 1915, 15 Cr.
(3) Section 4 (1} (c) — A notice of forfeiture by the Government specifying
certain letters and communications purporting to come from H. C. Mujrim of Rawal-
pindi, and entitled or headed Personal Rule, Personal Rule II and Personal Rule III
(published in certain issues of the newspaper concerned), as being of the nature described in
section 4 (1) (c) of the Indian Press Act, complied sufficiently with the terms of section
9 of the Act and was not open to objection on the ground that it did not set out
expressly selected words or passages from the three letters or communications referred to.
The words in section 4 (1) (c) the " Goveinment established by law in British India "
include Local Governments as well as the Government of India, and that Local
Government includes a Chief Commissioner (vidi General Clauses Act, 1897, Sections
(21) and (29). That inasmuch as the letters or communications in question teemed
with passages which were likely or " might " have a tendency to bring into hatred
or contempt the Government established by law in the North West Frontier Province
within the terms of section 4 (1) (c) the Court was not in these proceedings concerned
with the question whether the statements were true or false.
Lala Karam Cbaud v. Crown. Cr. P. R. No, 14.
(4) Section 4.— Following 14 P, R. (Cr.) 1913 (2) above)— (I) that the term Government
established by law in British India as used in s, 4 of the Press Act includes a Local
Government ; that the Court was not concerned with the motives for writing the articles
in question. Whether the articles were likely to bring Government into hatred or
contempt or to excite hatred or contempt or to excite hatred or contempt against tha
Christian subjects of His Majesty in India ; Held further, that no amount of professed
loyalty on other occasions could be taken as nullifying the probable effects of the
58 THE INDIAN PRESS ACT, 1910.
writing contained in the article concerned and that the applicant had entirely faitexf
to prove that Government had established no case for forfeiture.
Ghulam Kader Kha'v. Crown (Zamidar Press case). Cr. P. 3,. 1914. No, 27,
(5) Sections 4, 1%, 17 and 19— On an application under the Indian Press Act, 1910;
to set aside the order of forfeiture of a pamphlet made by the Local Government, —
Held, that the oiius was cast on the petitioner to establish that it was impossible for the
pamphlet to come within the terms of s. 4 of the Act and that the functions of the High
Court were limited under Sections 17 and 19 to considering whether the petitioner had
discharged that onus: : the High Court had no jurisdiction to pronounce on the wisdom
or unwisdom of the order of forfeiture.
The direction in s. 12 of the Act ( " stating the ground of its opinions ") was-
mandatory, and it was not a compliance with the direction merely to cite the \\ ords
of the section invoked without setting out facts on which the opinion was based, bat
the High Court was debarred by s. 22 from questioning the legality of the forfeiture
on that ground. In an enquiry under this Act, the question of the intention of the
writer or publisher is not directly material.
Pet Stephen J. — The omission of the Local Government to comply with the
mandatory direction contained in s. 12 did not oust the jurisdiction of the High
Court to revise the order of forfeiture on its merits.
In re Mahomed Ali. 4l Cal, 460.
(6) Section 8. — The petitioner is the declared proprietor of the press and the declared
printer and publisher of a weekly Persian Journal that is issued under the name of
" Hablul Matin. " Since the Italo— Turkish war and the Balkan war the petitioner has
been issuing what are described as daily supplementary editions of the Persian Journal
in Bengali and Urdu and for such production from his press as well as for any English
edition that may hereafter be issued he has been ordered by the Chief Presidency
Magistrate to furnish security in the sum of Us. 1,500, Against that order the-
petitioner moved this Court and obtained this Rule. On further examining the law on
the subject we find that the order complained of could have been passed under section 8
of the Indian Press Act (I of 1910) only and the learned Advocate-General, who
appears for the Crown, urges that it was so, though the Chief Presidency Magis-
trate has not in express terms stated the section or the Act under which the order was-
made. In our view of the law an order passed under section 8 of Act I of 19 JO is not-
revisable by this Court. This rule therefore must be discharged for that reason.
Hablul Matin. Reported in 17 C, W. N., 1246,
(7) Section 7.- When the language of an Act is plain and admits but of one meaning it
must be enforced and that the Courts are not concerned with any question of the reason-
ableness of the enactment or of the policy or possible intention of the legislature ; that
limitation for an application under s. 17 of the Act starts from the date of the order of*
forfeiture, and that the provisions of s, 5 of the Limitation Act are not applicable to
such an application.
Abdul Haq v. Crown, (Rifa-i-arn case).
No, 16 Cr. P. R. 1914.
(8) Held, that it had not been shown that the Government order was wrong on the
merits ; further that the Court had no authority under 8, 19 to reduce the penalty,
•without setting aside the order of forfeiture.
Ghulam Kadir Khan v. Crown. Respondent. P. R. 1914, 28 Cr,
PREVENTION OF SEDITIOUS MEETINGS ACT, 19 11. 59
Statement of Objects and Reasons, published with the Bill.
1. The Prevention of Seditious Meetings Act, 1907, which was con-
tinued by the Continuing Act 1910, until the thirty-first day of March 1914,
will expire on the last-named date unless further coctinued. It is now
deemed advisable, instead of merely continuing or making permanent the
existing Act, to introduce a Bill to consolidate and amend the law relating to
the prevention of public meetings likely to promote sedition or to cause
disturbance of public tranquillity.
2. The following are the main points in respect of which the pro-
visions of the Bill differ from those of the existing Act : —
Section 2 . — Notifications of proclaimed areas, and the making of fur-
ther notifications are to be subject to the previous sanction of the Grovernor-
(reneral in Council.
Section 3. — Clause (3) of this section is omitted.
Section 4> CO- The words "or of any political subject" are omitted.
Section 4 0-), («) and (b). — The words " District Magistrate " are substitnted
for the words "District Superintendent of Police. "
Section 4 (2). — The words "The District Magistrate " or any Magistrate
of the first class authorised by the Disirict Magistrate in this behalf" are
substituted for the words "Any officer of Police, not below the rank of an
Inspector . "
Section 7. — The word "or on any political subject " are omitted.
The 14th March 1911. J. L. JENKINS.
The following Eeport of the Select Committee on the Bill to consolidate
and amend the law relating to the prevention of public meetings likely to
promote sedition or to cause a disturbance of public tranquility was present-
ed to the Council of the Governor-General of India for the purpose of
making Laws and Regulations on the 20th March 1911 : —
WE, the undersigned Members of the Select Committee to which the
Bill to consolidate and amend the law relating to the prevention of public
meetings likely to promote sedition or to cause a disturbance of public
tranquility was referred, have considered the Bill and have now the honour
to submit this our Report, with the Bill as amended by us annexed thereto.
The amendments which we have suggested are explained below,
2. Clause Z", sub-clause (2). — At present a notification under this sub-
clause must extend to a whole province. We have inserted the words " or
parts of provinces " in order to enable the Government of India to limit
future notifications to such parts of provinces as they may think fit.
3. Clause 4> sub-clause (#). — We have inserted words limiting the
police-officers who may be deputed to attend meetings such as are not be-
low the rank of Head Constable.
4. Clause 8 is new. We think that offences against the proposed Act
should be triable only by a Presidency Magistrate or a Magistrate of the
first class or Sub-divisional Magistrate.
5. The addition of a clause limiting the duration of the proposed Act
was suggested by certain of our number, but as a majority of us were
unable to accept this suggestion, it has not been adopted.
60 PREVENTION OF SEDITIOUS MEETINGS ACT^ 1911.
(Sd.) J. L. Jenkins ; Syed AH Imam ; B. C. Mahtab; M. flaque; Syed
Shamsul Huda ; M. B. Dadabhoy; P&rtab Singh; Abdul Majid ; J. Andrew ;
H.O.Quin; F. A. T. Philips; J. M, Holms ^ A. Eade; H. S. P. Davies;
H, LE Mesurier.
The 18tk March, 1911.
Note of dissent.
We regret the decision of the Government to re-enact this legislation
and place it permanently on the Statute-book of this country. The only
justification for such measures is the prevalence .of an exceptional state
of things, and happily that justification no longer exists. The highest
authorities have freely admitted that a vast improvement has taken place
in the general situation of the country, and in our opinion, the best
policy to pursue at this juncture is to let things return to their normal
condition as quietly as possible. We recognise that some of the more
objectionable features of the Act of 1907 have been removed in the present
Bill, but it it proposed now to make the measure permanent and we
find ourselves unable to assent to this course.
Sd. G. K, Gokhate; Bhupendra Nath Basu, M, Haque; R. N.
Mudholkar,
18th March, 1911.
ACT NO. X OF 1911.
PASSED BY THE GOVERNOR GENERAL OF INDIA IN COUNCIL.
{Received the assent of the Governor General on the 22nd March 1911).
An Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to the prevention of
public meetings likely to promote sedition or to cause a disturbance of
public tranquillity.
Whereas it is expedient to consolidate and amend the law relating to
the prevention of public meetings likely to promote sedition or to cause
a disturbance of public tranquility ; It is hereby enacted as follows : —
1. (1) This Act may be called the Prevention
Short title and extent. Qf Seditious Meetings Act, 1911.
(8) It extends to the whole of British India, but shall have operation
only in such Provinces or parts of Provinces as the Governor General in
Council may from time to time notify in the Gazette of India.
2. (1) The Local Government may, with the previous sanction of the
Power of Local Government Governor General in Council, by notification
to notify proclaimed areas. in the Local Official Gazette, declare the whole or
any part of a Province, in which this Act is for the time being in operation,
to be a proclaimed area.
PREVENTION OF SEDrrious MEETINGS ACT, 1911. 61
(2) A notification made under sub-section (I) shall not remain in force
for more than six months, but nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed
to prevent the Local Government, with the previous sanction of the Governor
General in Council, from making any further notifications in respect of
the same area from time to time as it may think fit.
3. (1) In this Act, the expression " public meeting " means a meeting
Definition which is open to the public or any class or por-
tion of the public.
(%) A meeting may be a public meeting notwithstanding that it is
held in a private place and notwithstanding that admission thereto may
have been restricted by ticket or otherwise.
4. (1) No public meeting for the furtherance or discussion of any
Notice to be given of public subject likely to cause disturbance or public
meetings. excitement or for the exhibition or distribution
of any writing or printed matter relating to any such subject shall be held
in any proclaimed area —
(a) unless written notice of the intention to hold such meeting and
of the time and place of such meeting has been given to the
District Magistrate or the Commissioner of Police, as the case
may be, at least three days previously ; or
(b) unless permission to hold such meeting has been obtained in
writing from the Magistrate or the Commissioner of Police,
as the case may be.
(#) The District Magistrate or any Magistrate of the first class autho-
Power of Magistrate to cause rised by the District Magistrate in this behalf
report to be taken may, by order in writing, depute one or more
Police officers, not being below the rank of head constable, or other
persons to any such meeting for the purpose of causing a report to be
taken of the proceedings.
(3) Nothing in this section will apply to any public meeting held
Exce t. under any statutory or other express legal autho-
rity or to public meetings convened by a Sheriff
or to any public meetings or class of public meetings exempted for that
purpose by the Local Government by general or special order.
5. The District Magistrate or the Commissioner of Police, as the case
Power to prohibit public may be, may at any time, by order in writing,
meetings. of which public notice shall forthwith be given,
prohibit any public meeting in a proclaimed area, if in .his opinion, such
meeting is likely to promote sedition or disaffection or to cause a distur-
bance of the public tranquillity.
6. (1) Any person concerned in the promotion or conduct of a public
meeting held in proclaimed area contrary to the
provisions of sections 4 shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or
with both.
(%) Any public meeting which has been prohibited under section 5
shall be deemed to be an unlawful assembly within the meaning of Chapter
VIII of the Indian Penal Code and of Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1898.
62 CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1913,
7. Whoever, in a proclaimed area, in a public place 01 a place of public
Penalty for delivery of resort, otherwise than at a public meeting held
speeches in public places. [n accordance with, or exempted from, the pro-
visions of section 4, without the permission in writing of the Magistrate
of the District or of the Commissioner of Police, as the case may be,
previously obtained, delivers any lecture, address or speech on any subject
likely to cause disturbance or public excitement to persons then present,
may be arrested without warrant and shall be punished with imprison-
ment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with
both.
8. No Court inferior to that of a Presidency Magistrate or of a Magis-
~ , „. trate of the first class or Sub-divisional Magis-
trate shall try any offence against this Act.
9. The Prevention of Seditious Meetings Act, 1907, and the Gontinu-
Repeals. ing Act, 1910, are hereby repealed.
CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1913.
Statement of Objects and Reasons, published with the Bill.
The sections of the Indian Penal Code which deal directly with the
subject of conspiracy are those contained in Chapter V and section 121 A of
that Code. Under the latter provision it is an offence to conspire to commit
any of the offences punishable by section 121 of the Indian Penal Code or
to conspire to deprive the King of the sovereignity of British India or of
any part thereof or to overawe, by means of criminal force or the show of
criminal force, the Government of India or any Local Government and to
constitute a conspiracy under this section it is not necessary that any act
or illegal omission should take place in pursuance therof. Under section 107
abetment includes the engaging with one or more person or persons in any
conspiracy for the doing of a thing, if an act or illegal omission takes
place in pursuance of that conspiracy and in order to the doing of that thing,
In other words, except in respect of the offences particularized in section
121 A, conspiracy per se is not an offence under the Indian Penal Code.
On the other hand by the common law of England if two or more
persons agree together to do any thing contrary to law or to use unlawful
means in the carrying out of an object not otherwise unlawful the
person who so agree commit the offence of conspiracy. In other words
conspiracy in England may be defined as an agreement of two or more
persons to do an unlawful Act or to do a lawful act by unlawful means,
and the parties to such a conspiracy are liable to indictment.
Experience has shown that dangerous conspiracies are entered into in
India which have fur their object aims other than the commission of the
offences specified in section 121 A of the Indian Penal Code and that
existing law is inadequate to deal with modern conditions. The present
Bill is designed to assimilate the provisions of the Indian Penal Code to
those of the English law with the additional safeguard that in the case of a
conspiracy other than a conspiracy to commit an offence, some overt act is
necessary to bring the conspiracy within the purview of the criminal law.
The Bill makes criminal conspiracy a substantive offence, and when such
a conspiracy is to commit an offence punishable with death, transportation
or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, and no
CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1913 63
express provision is made in the Code provides a punishment of the same
nature as that which might; be awarded for the abetment of snch an offence.
In all other cases of criminal conspiracy the punishment contemplated is
imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding six months or
with fine or with both.
The %ttth February 1913, E. H, CEADDOCK.
The following' Report of the Select Committee on the Bill further to
amend the Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898,
was presented to the Council of the Governor-General of India for the
purpose of making Laws and Regulations on the llth March 1913.
We, the undersigned, Members of the Select Committee to which the
Bill further to amend the Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1898, was referred, have considered the Bill and have now the
houour to submit this our Report with the Bill as amended by u& annexed
thereto.
2 In order to avoid any possible danger of the provisions of the
Bill being misused, we have added two new clauses. The first of these
provides for cases of criminal conspiracy to commit offences referred to
in section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, and requires
the same sanction for prosecutions or conspiracies to commit such
offences as is required for prosecutions for the offences themselves.
3. The second clause provides that no Court shall take cognizance of
any criminal conspiracy to commit certain offences specified in
section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, or to commit illegal
acts which are not offences or to effect legal objects by illegal means save
upon'4complaint made by or under the authority of the Governor General
in Council, the Local Government or some officer empowered by the
Governor General in Council in that behalf.
4. It further provides that courts shall not take cognizance of criminal
conspiracies to commit non-cognizable offences or cognizable offences
punishable with less than two years' rigorous imprisonment without the
consent in writing of the Local Government or of a District Magistrate or
Chief Presidency Magistrate empowered in this behalf by tha Local Govern-
ment. 0
5. We think that these safeguards will satisfactorily ensure that the
provisions of the Bill will only be used when prosecutions aie necessary in
the public interest.
6. We have amended the Schedule so as to make it clear that no case
of criminal conspiracy is to be tried by any Magistrate other than a Presi-
dency Magistrate or Magistrate of the 1st class.
7. We think that the Bill has not been so altered as to require re-
publication, and we recommend that it be passed as now amended.
Sd. Syed Ali Imam; R. H. Craddock ; Gopal Saran Singh; A.M.
Monteath ; G. M. Chitnavis ; F. C. Ebrahirn ; P Rama Rayaningar ; M. M.
Malaviya;*W. H. Vincent; H. Wheeler; G. H. B. Kenrick ; C. H.
Kesteven ; A. Meredith; J. Walker; D. B. Blakeway ; M. S. Das ; R. Sinha.
The 10th March, 1913.
64 CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT,
Note of Dissent.
This Bill has been introduced and is being dealt with as an emergent
measure. Its scope should, therefore, in my opinion, be limited fco offences
which require emergency to be provided against; but as the Bill stands it ia
extremely comprehensive. The word " illegal " used in the definition of a
criminal conspiracy is as it is defined in the Indian Penal Code, "applicable
to everything which is an offence, or which is prohibited by law or which
furnishes ground for a civil action. " This definition would make even a
case of civil trespass indictable as a criminal conspiracy and would thus go
beyond the law as it prevails in England.
It is true that in England indictments for conspiracy extend to almost
every possible sort of case ; but in India section 121 A of the Indian Penal
Code has hitherto been the only one section which renders punishable *
mere conspiracy to do an illegal act which does not go beyond a cons-
piracy. In view of the special circumstances of the present situation, I
am prepared to suppprt the Bill as amended so far as it extends the law ot
conspiracy to specified grave offences to which in the opinion of the Govern-
ment its extension may be necessary to enable the Government effectually
to prevent and punish criminal conspiracies directed against the State,,
or the object of which is to commit murder or dacoity or similar grave-
crimes ; but the proposal so to extend the law of conspiracy that it should
cover every criminal offence, everything which is prohibited by law and
every cause which furnishes ground for a civil action, stands on a very
different footing. It has not been urged that snch an extension is a
matter of pressing necessity. The pros and cons of it call for further
deliberation and more detailed examination. Such a proposal should
therefore, be dealt with in the ordinary and regular way by a Bill
embodying it being circulated for opinion among the judicial and execu-
tive officers of Government and representative public men and bodies
and should be considered in the light of the opinions so gathered. To
carry this part of the Bill through along with an emergent piece of
legislation seems to me to be open to grave objection.
10th March 1913. MADAN MOHAN MALAVIYA.
ACT No. VIII OF 1913.
(Received the assent of the Governor-General on the 27th March 1913.)
An Act further to amend the Indian Penal Code and the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1898.
WHEREAS it is expedient further to amend the Indian Penal Code and
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 : It is hereby enacted as follows : —
«. 1. This Act mav be called the Criminal
Short titlei _ . J1A10
Law Amendment Act, 1913.
2. In section 40 of the Indian Penal Code, after the word and figures
Amendment of action 40, " Chapter IV the word, figure and letter
Indian Penal Code. " Chapter VA shall be inserted.
CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1913. C5
Insertion of new Chapter 3 After Chapter V of the said Code, the fol-
in the ludkn Peual Code. lowing Chapter shall be inserted, namely ;—
Punishment of criminal
conspircy.
"CHAPTER VA."
CBIMINAL. CONSPIRACY.
Definition' of Criminal 1 20 A. When two or more persons agree to do,
conspiracy. or cause to be done : —
(1) an illegal act, or
(2) an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is
designated a criminal conspiracy :
Provided that no agreement except an agreement to commit an offence*
shall amount to a criminal conspiracy unless same act besides the agreement
is done by one or more parties to such agreement in pursuance thereof.
Explanation.— It is- immaterial whether the illegal act is the ultimate*
object of such agreement, or is merely incidental to that object.
I20B. (1) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit ait
offence punishable with death, transportation or
rigorous- imprisonment for a term of t^o years or
upwards, shall, where no express provision is-
made in this Code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in
the same manner as if he had abetted such offence.
(2) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a criminal
conspiracy to commit an offence punishable as aforesaid shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding six months,
or with fine or with both."
4. In section 195, sub-section (o\ of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1898, before the words " the abetment ", the
cWcri^Sg T* " °T^ ,co,fra0ieS £ commit such
1898. offences and to shall be inserted.
5. After section 196 of the Code (of Criminal Procedure, 1898), the
Insertion of new section following section shall be inserted, namely : —
196Ain Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1898.
" 196 A. No Court shall take cognizance of the offence of criminal
•Prosecution for certain conspiracy punishable under section I20Bofthe
classes of criminal conspiracy. Indian Penal Code,
(1) in a case where the object of the conspiracy is to commit either an
illegal act other than an offence, or a legal act by illegal means,
or an offence to which the provisions of section 196 apply, un-
less upon complaint made by order under authority from the
Governor-General in Council, the Local Government or some
officer empowered by the Governor-General in Council in this
behalf, or
(2) in a case where the object of the conspiracy is to commit any non-
cognizable oflence, or a cognizable offence not punishable with
death, transportation or rigorous imprisonment for a term of
two years or upwards unless the Local Government or a Chief
Presidency Magistrate or District Magistrate empowered in
this behalf by the Local Government has, by order in writingr
consented to the initiation of the proceedings :
66
CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1913.
Provided that where the criminal conspiracy is one to which the
provisions of sub-section ^3) of section 195 apply no such consent shall be
necessary.
6. In Schedule II of the Code (of Criminal Procedure, 1898), after the
Amendment of Schedule II entries relating to Chapter V, the entries con-
tained in the Schedule hereto annexed shall be
inserted.
of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1898.
SCHEDULE.
" CHAPTER VA."
Criminal Conspiracy.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
12 >B.
Criminal
May arrest
According
According
Not
The same
Court of Ses-
conspira c y
without
as a war-
as the
com-
punishment
sion when the
to commit
warrant if
rant or
off e nee
pound-
as that pro-
offence which.
an offence
punishable
with death,
arrest for
the offence
which is
summons
may issue
for the
which is
the object
of the
able.
vided for
the abet-
ment of the
is the object of
the conspiracy
is triable ex-
transporta-
the object
offence
conspiracy
o ff e n c e
clusively by
tion or ri-
of the con-
which is
is bailable
which is
such Court, in
gorous im-
spiracy may
the object
or not.
the object
the case of all
prisonment
be made
of the
of the con-
other offences
for a term
wi t h o u t
conspi-
spiracy.
Court ; of Ses-
of two years
warrant but
racy.
sion, Presiden-
or upwards.
not other-
cy Magistrate
wise.
or Magistrate
of the tirst
1
Any other
Shall not
Summons
Bailable
Ditto
Impri s o n -
class.
Presidency
cr i m i n a 1
arrest with-
ment of
Magisti ate or
conspiracy.
out a war-
either des-
Magistrate of
rant.
cription for
the first class.
six
months and
fine or both.
Notes.
The fact that proceedings for participation in a dacoity against certain individuals were
dropped owing to insufficiency of evidence, does not preclude a charge for conspiracy in
respect of that dacoity from being brought against the same persons and others for the
criminality of a conspiracy is distinct from and independent of criminality of overt acts.
Lathi play by itself is perfectly harmless and standing alone cannot be treated as evidence
of conspiracy to wage war. To attach sinister significance to the mere association in play or
pastimes of those that live in the same village or attend the same school would be dangerous
specially when those exercises were undertaken with a complete absence of secrecy
and rather with a courting of publicit}'. In the absence of " a joint design, a joint
association proved to have had revolutionary designs. A letter written by a stranger to a
" combination " one association could not be held to be a branch of another association
proved to have had revolutionary designs. A. letter written by a stranger to a conspirator
which is not shown to have been received or replied to or otherwise acted upon by the
later is not sufficient to establish the former's connection with the conspiracy so as to make
his acts done in pursuance of the conspiracy. Overt acts may properly be looked at as
evidence of the existence of a concerted intention and in many cases it is only by means
of overt acts that the existence of the conspiracy can be made out. But the criminality of
the conspiracy is independent of the criminality of the overt acts. The prosecution is
not obliged to prove a conspiracy by direct evidence of the agreement to do an unlawful
CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1913. 67
act. If the fact? proved are such that the jury, as reasonable men, can say that there was a
common design and the prisoners were acting in concert to do what is wrong,, that is
evidence from which the jury may suppose that a conspiracy was actually formed. Where
it appeared tbat certain members of a society found to be revolutionary were not acquainted
with the real object of the society, not having been admitted to its secrets it was held th;ifc
it would not be proper to convict such members under s. 121 A of the Indian Penal Code.
The criminality of a conspiracy lying in the concerted intention, once reasonable grounds are
-made out for belief in the existence of the conspiracy amongst the accused, the acts of each
conspirators in furtherance of the object are evidence against each of the others, and tnis
whether such acts were done before or after his entry into the combination in his presence or iu
his absence, Conspirators are not thereby necessarily subjected to punishment for everything
done by their fellows ; but acts prior to the entry of a particular person into the combination
are evidence to show the nature of the concert to which he becomes a party whilst subsequent
acts of the other members would indicate further the character of the common design in which
all are presumed to be equally concerned. If arms were collected and secreted in furtherance
of a conspiracy before the activities of the associates had* been brought to an end by their
arrest, the fact that they were discovered after the arrest and after prosecution had been
started against them would not make the evidence of the find inadmissible at
the trial. The mere circumstances that a book of an objectionable character is present in
the library of an individual or an association does not justify the inference tbat the teaching-?
of the books are approved and adopted by persons who have access to it. The mere fact
that books of a distinctly revolutionary character were found in the library of an association
an 1 were now and then read by some of its members, would not conclusively show that the
object of the society was revolutionary. The presence of seditious literature of this
description written by members of the society would however be an important element in
furnishing a clue to their tendencies and designs. The utmost that can be said of persons
in whose library are found books which ara»calculated to excite hatred against the English,
is that they approved of literature of that nature and even that assumption
would not in all cases be a just one. But the presence in the library of a Samity of
violently revolutionary literature (some of them written in the hands of a member
of the Samity) urging the destruction of the English and exulting persons who had
murdered English people justified the inference that the members of the Samity were
imbued with the sentiments those documents expressed. When persons engaged in
a conspiracy within the meaning of s. 12 1 A of the Penal Code in furtherance of their
object conceal the existence of the conspiracy from the authorities a charge under s. 123
of the Penal Code may be legally joined with one under s. 121A,
Pulin Behari Dass v. King-Emperor (1911). Reported in 16 C. W. N. ll'<5.
The case was tried by the Sessions Court Delhi who after a long trial passed orders on
the uth October 1914 acquitting five of the accused and convicting the other six under
s. 302 — 102 B, of the Indian Penal Code, and sentencing three to death and the remaining
three to transportation for life.
Two of the accused were tried on a charge under sections 4, 5 and 6 of the
Explosive Substances Aot. They were found guilty and sentenced to transportation for 20
years. The ca<e came on appeal before the Chief Court and judgment was delivered by
Johnstone, J., on the loth February 1915 and is reported in Punjab Record for July 1915,
Held per curiam, that a charge under section 302 — 102-B, of the Penal Code is not bad
and that the terms of section 10 of the Evidence Act are " wider " than the English Law
on the subject, and Johustone, J. that where the prosecution has produced prima facie proof
of a conspiracy fb murder and that the appellants were one and all member? of that
conspiracy, anything said or done by any one of the conspirators whether accused or not,
in reference to the said common intention after that intention was first entertained by any of
them is a relevant fact against each and all of the accused as well for the purpose of proving
the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose of shewing that " any person " was a
party to it. Rattigau, J. that in order to decide in the present case whether any act done
or statement made or thing written by an alleged conspirator is admissible in evidence
against any of the accused persons, the test is to see first whether there is reasonable ground
to believe that a conspiracy existed between him and such persons and secondly whether such
act, statement or writing had reference to their common intention, that illustrations
appended to sections of an Act of the legislature are not to be taken as express provisions of
law or as binding on Courts. Johnstone, J. that having regard to sections 4, Ii4 illustration
(b) and 133 of the Evidence Act the Courts in the matter of the value of an accomplice's
evidence, are not tied down in any technical way but it is their duty, when deciding (i)
whether any corroboration of a particular accomplice is required, (ii) what amount or kind
of corroboration is required, to look at, the question as a prudent man, desiring to avoid
error and to arrive at the truth, would look at it. Rattigan, J, that if a Court, while
keeping in view the presumption that an accomplice is unworthy of credit unless he is
corroborated in material particulars and after making due allowance for the considerations
which render the evidence of an .accomplice untrustworthy, nevertheless, conies to tho
68 CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT A'CT, 1913,
conclusion that such evidence is true, although uncorroborated, fcnd that it 'establishes the
guilt of the accused, it is it* duty to convict. Held per curiam that the pardon granted
to the approver by the Committing Magistrate under section S3? of the Code of Criminal
Procedure was Valid notwiths anding that the Magistrate, besides inquiring into the offense
tinder section 120-B and 392, with which the accused were ultimately charged, was also
inquiring into an offence under section 124- A of the Penal Code which is not exclusively
triable by the Court of Sessions er the High Court, that although the evidence in the case
might also have supported charges under sections 12i-A and 124- A of the Penal Code no
sanction under section li)ii of the Code of Criminal Procedure was necessary as the learned
Magistrate did net try the accused for either of those offences, that as there was nothing
illegal in the procedure, adopted by the prosecution, of (proceeding against all the accused
upon the charge of the conspiracy to commit murder, instead of charging some of them
with the actual murder of deceased and the others with the oS'euce of entering
into the conspiracy to commit minder, the Court would not interfere with the discretion of
of the prosecution, particularly at this stage.
Johnstone, J. that there were net two conspiracies in this case font only o«e with two
objects, viz., to commit murder ami to caase disaffection by circulation of seditious litera-
ture and therefore the conviction of A.C. one of the accused appellants, who was said to have
conspired only in regard to the dissemination of seditious literal ure was not illegal.
Katingan J. that direct evidence of a conspiracy can scarcely be afforded and tke Court may
infer the existence of the general agreement from such acts and conduct of the various
accused persons from tirae to time as the prosecution may be able to prove that a conspiracy
to commit murder may be fairly and justifiably inferred from the facts that certain members
of the conspiracy actually did commit murder ^ that in the bouse of another member of the
conspiracy a bomb cap was discovered ; and that all the accused persons were concerned
directly or indirectly with the distribution of Ijjerature which was intended to incite
persons to commit murder, and that upon proof of such facts every wiernber of the
conspiracy would be responsible for an offence committed in pursuance of the conspiracy
and it would not be necessary to shew, that a particular member actually concerted the
offence with the member who committed it, that having regard to the terms of section 120li
of the Penal Code if A and B conspire to -commit murder and B. subsequently does commit
murder, A. is punishable as if he had abetted that murder, vide section ]<>9 — but if B bad
already committed a murder before A conspires with him to -commit, murder., A would be
liable to be punished (if in point of fact 110 other murder is committed) only to the extent
provided in section 115. Bat also that in the latter case the offence committed by B prior
to the entry of A into the conspiracy would be a relevant fact as indicatiag the nature
and objects of the conspiracy.
Balmokand and others v. Crown (1915). Reported in P. R. 1015 17 Cr.
* LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT, NOTIFICATION, DATED THE ?TH AUGUST 191 4.
Ordinance for securing tke control of the Press during war*
Whereas an emergency has arisen which makes it necessary to control
the publication of naval or military news or information ;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by section 23 of the
Indian Councils Act, 1861, the Governor- Gene-
ral is pleased to make and promulgate the
following ordinance : —
ORDINANCE No. 1 OF 1914.
1. (1) This Ordinance may be called the Indian Naval and Military
News (Emergency) Ordinance, 1914.
Short title and extent.
* By Act No. 1 of 1915, (The Emergency Legislation Continuance Act, J915) the pro-
visions of this Ordinance shall have effftot as if it had been enacted by the Governor-General
in Council and shall be in force during the continuance of the present War and for a period
of six months thereafter.
Provided that the Governor-General in Council may by notification in the Gazette of
India direct that any provision in the above Ordinance shall cease to be in f*rce at an
earlier date which may be specified in such notification.
"NAVAL AND MILITARY NEWS (EMERGENCY) ORDINANCE, 1914. 69
(2) It extends to the whole of British India, including British Balu-
•chista.n, the Son thai Parganas, the District of Angul, the Shan States
and the Pargana of Spiti; -and it applies also to : —
(a) all Native Indian subjects of His Majesty in any place without
and beyond British India;
(b) all other British subjects within the territories of any Native
Prince or Chief in India ; and
(c) all servants of His Majesty, whether British subjects or not,
within the territories of any Native Prince or Chief in India.
2. It shall not be lawful to publish any information with reference
Prohibition of publication *? movements or dispositions of troops, ships,
of naval or military news air-craft or war material or to the strategic
or information. or other plans or schemes of the naval or military
authorities of any part of the British Empire or to any works or
measures undertaken for or connected with the defence or fortification
of the British Empire or any part thereof or any statement, comment or
suggestion calculated directly or indirectly to convey any such informa-
tion except when such information has been supplied for publication
under the authority of the Governor-General in Council or of a Local
Government, or has been approved for publication by an officer appointed
in this behalf,
(a) by the Governor-General in Council ; or,
(b) by any officer to whom the Governor-General in Council ha3
delegated the power of such appointment.
Explanation. — In this section the expression " British Empire "
includes all territories under the suzerainty or protection of His
Majesty.
3. The publisher, editor and printer of any newspaper, magazine,
Penalties book, pamphlet or other document by means of
which any information, statement, comment or
suggestion is published in contravention of this ordinance shall severally
be punishable in respect of each offence with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to one year or with fine which
may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both, and any other person
who sells any newspaper, magazine, book, pamphlet or other document
knowing it to contain any such information, statement, comment or
suggestion or who is otherwise knowingly responsible for the publication
of any such information, statement, comment or suggestion shall be liable
to a similar penalty.
4. (1) No court shall proceed to the trial of any offence punishable
Restriction on trial of undfr ,this ordinance unless upon complaint
offences. made by order of, or under authority from,
the Governor-General in Council, the Local
Government or some officer empowered by the Governor-General in
Council in this behalf.
(2) No magistrate other than a presidency magistrate, district magis-
trate, or sub-divisional magistrate shall take cognizance of or try any
offence punishable under this ordinance.
70 NAVAL AND MILITARY NEWS (EMERGENCY) ORDINANCE, 1914.
5. Any police officer may seize any newspaper, magazine, book,
Power of police officer to pamphlet or other document in which any
seize documents publishing information, statement, comment or suggestion
information in contravention is published in contravention of this Ordinance,
and such officer shall forward anything seized
to a presidency magistrate, district magistrate, or sub-divisional magis-
trate, having jurisdiction ia the place where such tiling was seized.
6. (1) Whenever any newspaper, magazine, book, pamphlet or other
Power of magistrate to document is published in contravention of this
confiscate documents pub- Ordinance, a presidency magistrate, district
lished in contravention of magistrate or sub-divisional magistrate may,
whether the offender is convicted or not, order
that all copies of such newspaper, magazine, book, pamphlet or other
document within the limits of his jurisdiction shall be confiscated.
(2) A magistrate making an order under sub-section (1) may issue
a warrant to any police officer to seize and detain anything confiscated
under that sub-section and to search for such thing in any place where
such thing is known or reasonably suspected to be.
7. (I) Whenever a presidency magistrate, district magistrate, or
Power of magistrate to sub-divisional magistrate is satisfied from a
issue search warrants and police report or otherwise that any information,
order confiscation in certain statement, comment or suggestion is being or is
cases- likely to be published in contravention of this
ordinance within the limits of his jurisdiction he may issue a warrant to
a police officer to search for, seize and detain any document containing
such information, statement, comment or suggestion.
(2) Such magistrate may order that anything seized under a warrant
issued under sub-section (1) shall be confiscated.
8. A police officer to whom a warrant under section 6 or section 7
Power of police officer ex- is directed may search in any place and seize
ecuting search warrant. and detain anything in accordance with the pro-
visions of the warrant and shall forward anything seized to the magis-
trate by whom the warrant was issued.
9. No order made or purporting to be made in accordance with the
t provisions of this ordinance directing or relat-
Bar of jurisdiction of courts. f ,, « i
mg to the issue of a search-warrant or the
confiscation of anything shall be called in question in any court, and no
civil or criminal proceeding shall be instituted against any magistrate or
police officer for anything done in good faith under this Ordinance or
purporting to be so done.
10. A certificate signed by a Secretary to the Government of India
Certificate by Secretary to to the fact that any territory is or is not under
Government to be evidence the suzerainty or protection of His Majesty
of certain facts. shall, in any preceding under this Ordinance,
be conclusive evidence of such fact,
11. Save as otherwise expressly provided the provisions of the Code
Application of Code of Cri- of Criminal Procedure, 1898, shall apply to all
minai Proceedure, 1898, to proceedings under this Ordinance.
proceedings under this
Ordinance- HARDINGE OF PEXSHCTKST,
Viceroy and Governor- General.
Defence of India (Criminal Law Amendment) Bill,
1915-
Extract from His Excellency the Viceroy's speech in the Council: meeting
held fit Delhi on thelSth March 1915. <;
Before the formal introduction of the proposed Bill to provide for
special measures to secure the public safety and the defence of British
India and for the more speedy trial of certain offences, I would like to
address a few words to Hon'ble Members of my Council.
In a speech that I made to you in this Council Chamber on the 12th
January, I informed you of the desire of my Government that so far as
might be possible the discussion of all controversial questions should be
avoided during the course of the war. I pointed out thatj in adopting
this course, we should be following the example of the British Parliament
where all political controversy has been suspended during the war, and
where the leaders of the Opposition have refrained from any action which
might tend to embarrass the Government. In consequence of the decision
my Government have deferred the consideration of a number of important
measures of a more or less controversial nature already introduced in
Council, as well as the introduction of other Bills. In maintaining this
decision, my Government have been loyally assisted by Hon'ble Members,
and I should like to take this opportunity of expressing my appreciation
and gratitude for your attitude.
In the Bill that is before you to-day, I do not attempt to disguise the
fact that it is a measure that presents openings for controversy, and I would
have been very pleased to think that we could have done without it, but
we have felt that a precautionary measure of this nature has becomo
necessary in order to ensure public peace and tranquillity. You will
observe that it is a war measure, to last during the period of the war and
for six months afterwards ; that on enactment certain important clauses
dtfnot apply automatically to the whole of India, but only to those districts
or provinces which upon the advice of Local Governments may be notified
by the Governor-General in Council. It rests with the people of India
to decide how far it may be necessary to put those clauses into force.
The fact that such a Bill has become necessary in India as a precautionary
measure cannot be regarded as in any way a slur on the people, since it
follows in general outline the Defence of the Realm Act passed in both
Houses of Parliament and now in force in the United Kingdom, but in so
iar as trial by court martial is replaced by trial by special Commissioners
is of a less drastic nature. Law-abiding England accepted this measure
without a murmur, realising that in such a situation solus populi suprema
to. Too may possibly ask what is the reason for thii legislation. T»
7t DEFENCE OP INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
that I would reply that there is cause for precautionary measures and for
quickening up the procedure of justice. You may yourselves . have heard
rumours of attempts to disturb the public peace ; I know- that some of
you have heard them and although I do not want to go into details, you
may take it from me that Government are in possession of information
that proves conclusively that a precautionary measure of this kind is
absolutely necessary to meet an emergency that may arise. There is no
one iu this land more jealous than I am of the honour of India and of the
striking reputation for loyalty that India so rightly deserves, and I am
not disposed to allow the honour and fair fame of India to be tarnished
by the criminal acts of a few ill-balanced minds at a moment when India's
sons are shedding their blood on the battlefield for the King-Emperor
and country.
It itf a fact that I might have elected to promulgate an Ordinance
embodying the provisions of the Act that is before you, but for political
and other reasons and in view of the fact that my Legislative Council is in
sessions, I have preferred to take my Council into our confidence, to place
the matter before you, and to invite your help and co-operation in enacting
a measure so essential to the public weal, and I am confident that you
will not refuse.
I will now call upon Sir Reginald Craddock to move for leave to
introduce the Bill.
from His Excellency the Viceroy's speech d-ited the 12th January 19l5t referrcdto
fa paragraph £ of his speech on page 71.
I now desire to invite the attention of Members of this Council to a matter of importance
which immediately concerns the business of the present session. It is the desire of the
Government of India, so far as may be possible, the discussion of all controversial
questions should be avoided during the continuance of the war. The present emergency
necessitates the enactment of a particular measure to ' which I will refer later, and for
obvious reasons the introduction of this Bill cannot be postponed. Jn regard, however, to
legislation not immediately necessary to meet the requirements of the present situation,
I and my Government consider that it would be most inadvisable at this juncture, when
the mimlfi of all are concentrated on one object, the protection of the Kmpire against a-
ruthless ami powerful enoiny, to undertake any legislation which might provoke anything
approaching controversy and friction. The one feeling now prominent in the mind of every
loval citizen is the necessity for united action to vanquish the common enemy, and no part
of Empire has come forward more readily and enthusiastically than India to render
assistance to His Majesty's Government. We mav have different points of view as to method*
of administration and as to details of domestic legislation but in a time of common danger we
vbould present an united front and it is clearly our duty to sink all minor differences to
seek and pursue but one object, the successful conduct of the war against the enemiesftof
the British Empire It is not that 1 think that the differences to which I have alluded ara
likely to be of a serious character, but I feel, and I hope you will agree with me, that this
is a time when all appearance of division should be avoided, as such differences might be
misconstrued by those who are strangers to Indian conditions. In this view we have
decided to defer the consideration of a number of measures already introduced in Council,
and to postpone the introduction of other Bills. Amongst these I may mention the
Criminal Procedure Code Amendment Bill, for the further protection of Minors, the Bill
dealing with contempts of Courts, aud the Universities Bill. We recognise the fact that,
important as these Bills are, they are necessarily to some extent controversial, and in
Tie w of the present position, wo have decided that it would bo better not to proceed
further with them during this session,
DEFENCE OF INDIA
(CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
The HonTale Sir Reginald Craddock :— MyJLord, I move for leave
to introduce ci Bill to provide for special measures to secure the public
safety and the defence of British India and ior the more speedy trial
of certain offences.
As the Council is aware from the printed List of Business for
to-day, 1 shall present!) have to ask Your Lordship to suspend the
rules of business so as to allow of this Bill being considered and
passed at a single sitting of this Council, and it is therefore expedient)
that I should at once explain to the Council both the circumstances
which have determined the Government to bring forward this measure
and the nature and scope of the measure itself.
In the first place, My Lord it is a great tribute to the loyalty of India
and the peaceful behaviour of the vast majority of her people that, while
the British Government passed a Defence of the Realm Act at the out-
break of the war, we are now in India half way through the eighth month
of the war before we have found it necessary to enact a simlar measure
in India, for, though under another name, it is really a Defence of the
Kealm Act to which we ai-e to-day inviting the assent of the Council.
The powers that we are now asking for are the powers which in our
opinion are required for the purpose of securing the public safety and the
defence of British India, and we require these powers only during the
continuance of the war and for six mouths after ; — that is to say, until the
excitement and disturbance of the general calm, which the state of war
engenders, have had time to subside. These powers are primarily required
in the military interests of the country, since in ordinary times of peace it is
unnecessary to arm the military authorities with such special powers for the
protection of property of military value, and for the prevention of injury to
such property, or to the interests of the Army generally as are required when
the country is at war.
So far as the internal situation is concerned, Your Excellency's policy
has been throughout to preserve conditions in as normal a state as it was
possible to do, and to keep the current of the administration of the country
flowing in its ordinary tranquil channels; to take no action of any drastic
kind until necessity for such action was plainly manifest. That the Govern-
ment consider that the present measure has now become necessary need cause
no alarm to the country at large ; apart from the military interests involved, it
indicates nothing more than that there are in some parts of the country
sporadic manifestations of disorder which require to be nipped in the bud
lest they should grow and spread. Just as we deal vigorously with early
cases of a contagious disease lest the disease should become epidemic, so we
must deal vigorously with the early manifestations of a turbulent spirit
before they have had time to become epidemic.
This is the stage at which we are now. Certain disturbers of the general
tranquillity in a few parts of the country have taken advantage of the
opportunities which the state of war has created to break the peace. It is
no news to the Council that there has existed for sometime past on the
Pacific Coast of America, and in the Far East, a party of anarchists and
revolutionaries who have been engaged in scattering revolutionary seed
first among Indians in those countries, and secondly within India itself
74 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAtiT AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
by private communications, by despatch of emissaries, and by the dissemiir~
ation of anarchical an I revolutionary literature. This party, which may
be conveniently described as the Ghadar party, saw in the Great European
War their best opportunity for attempting to translate their doctrines into
action. Large numbers of deluded men intoxicated with this poison have
been returning to India during the last few monthsr and though the Govern-
ment of the Punjab have been able under a War Ordinance to put
under restraint a nunber of the leaders of this movement among, the return-
ing emigrants and many others of them who appeared to be dangerous,
yet the great majority about whom nothing was known were allowed to
return to their homes, as the Government had no desire to be strict with
possibly harmless people. But some of these together with their sympa-
thizers already in the country, have been committing or attempting to
commit acts of violence, and it is therefore of the greatest importance that
this mischief should be most promptly suppressed.
Closely akin to this movement is the anarchist movement in Bengal.
That we have had with us for a long time : sometimes it has been tempo-
rarily quiescent, and sometimes it has recrudesced, and at the present time
there has, as the Council is aware, been a severe recrudescence, and the
crimes committed have become increasing! }>• daring. These two move-
ments in the Punjab and Bengal are more closely connected than might be-
supposed. They may attract different kinds of followers and they may
pursue slighty different methods; but their ultimate aims are the
same, and the security of loyal Indiia requires that they should be
suppressed.
Thirdly, we come to a class of disorder which has characterized recent
disturbances in the Western Punjab. This is of a different kind and has no
definite political object when it starts ; — it is simply lawlessness, partly
induced by economic unrest. Men break out against the restraints of the-
law to plunder their weaker neighbours, and if this lawlessness is unchecked,
it soon asumes the aspect of rebellion against all constituted authority..
or it may take on the complexion of racial or religious rioting. In some of
the Western Punjab districts, indeed, it is rapidly be2oming a movement
among lawless Mohamedans, under the stress or pretext of high prices, to
loot and plunder their Hindu neighbours, to- wreck the shops and houses of
banias and burn their bonds and books. Violent mobs of this kind
rapidly swell in numbers : any success draws in fresh adherents or
produces imitators, and the danger may become a very serious one if it
is not effectively dealt with at the very start.
At a time of a war, like the present one which has extended
from Europe into Asia, there must always be wild rumours flying about
and potential disturbers of the peace may excite the people at large
more easily than in ordinary times, calling to their aid economic
unrest, or religious fanaticism. It is therefore particularly incumbent
on the Government to take all precautions against breakers of the public
tranquillity, or mischievous excitement of popular feeling.
These My Lord, are the causes which have led the Government
to intoduce this legislation. The disturbances have developed rapidly
during the last few weeks, and power to check them, and to stamp
out at once this lawless spirit has become a matter of great urgency
hence it is that the Council are being asked to pass thes- measure at
a single sitting.
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BfLL, 1915. 75
I will now turn, My Lord to the measure itself Thd first two
flections of the Bill will come into force throughout British India at once,
the remaining sections of the Bill only in those provinces or parts of
the provinces to which they may be extended by the Governor-General
in Council.
The first of these two sections refers only to the short title, duration and
^extent of the Act. The second section will give power to the Governor*
General in Council to make certain rules for the purpose of securing
the public safety and the defence of British India, and particularises,
without prejudice to the generality of this power, a number of specific
purposes for which the power may be exercised.
Section 2 is generally adopted from the English Defence of the Realm
Act and the regulations which have been issued thereunder. Thus sub-
clauses (a) and (6) very closely follow corresponding provisions of the
English Act, as also does sub-clause (c) read with Regulation No. 27,
although the prevention of the promotion of feelings of enmity and
hatred between different classes is more directly connected with the
special circumstances of this country, Sub-clause (d), which enables
measures to be taken to secure the safety of means of communication, of
the usual municipal services, and of specified areas, deals again with one
of the principal objects of the English Act, and the regulations under the
latter extend to the taking of possession, the right of entry and the preven-
tion of trespass, injury and approach to specified works. As an example
of the wide powers assumed in England as to the taking possession of
property and directing the disposal of property, which is covered by clause
(e), we find English regulations enabling the . removal and destruction of
property to be ordered, and factories and workshops to be taken over,
sub-clause (/), which permits of control over the movements and acts of
individuals is paralleled by English regulations which allow of the
removal of the inhabitants of whole areas as well as individuals, the
direction to thorn to remain within doors within specified hours and to
extinguish lights and the taking of census of private goods. After the
enumeration of various specific powers one clause of the English regula-
tions gives a general right to do any other act involving interference with
private rights of property which is necessary to secure the public safety
or the defence of the Realm. The control of explosives, inflammable
substances, arms and all munitions of war, which is the subject of sub-
clause (</), is very strictly controlled by the English regulations, and the
preservation of discipline among His Majesty's Forces, which is dealt with
in sub-clause (/i), is naturally both in the English legislation and the Bill
an important object of a war measure. Sub-clauses (i)t (j) and (k) deal
with the powers of search, arrest and prevention, and with the harbouring
of offenders, and all have their English counterparts.
The contravention of any of these rules, or of an order issued under
the authority of these rules, is made punishable with imprisonment up to
seven years and fine, and only if the intention of the person contravening
the rule or authorised order was to assist the King's enemies, or to wage
war against the King, will the offender be liable to the highest penalties
that the ordinary law of the land allows. When the Empire is in a state
of war, the rebellious subject and the alien enemy must necessarily fall
within the same category.
7$ DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
The Council will observe that offenders contravening these rules
will (except where section 3 and the succeeding section of this Bill are
jwt into effect; be triable by the ordinary procedure.
I will now turn to the third and following clauses of the Bill, which
will only be in force where specially extended by the Governor-General in
Council. This prescribes a special tribunal of three Commissioners for
the trial of acts which constitute offences under clause 2 of the Bill, as
well as for other offences known to the existing law, which are punishable
with death, transportation, or imprisonment for seven years, including
conspiracy to commit such offences, or attempt or abetment of such
offences.
In connection with this specially constituted tribunal, I must draw
attention oi the Council to the points in which we follow and the points
on which we diverge from the method of trial provided by the English
Act and the Regulations thereunder,
In the first place, as Your Excellency has pointed out, in England all
seriouj offences against the Regulations are triable only by courts martial
and only minor offences may be relegated to courts of summary jurisdic-
tion.
In our new measure, as I have stated, special courts to deal with
offeucds under the rules will only be constituted in special areas. In this,
therefore, we are much milder than the Regulations which have been our
model. Under our Bill (again only in those special areas) jurisdiction of
the Commissioners may be extended in cases of necessity to particular
serious offenders, or particular classes of offenders under the ordinary law.
This, it is true, has not been found necessary in England, because ordinary
crime there has largely diminished, and the ordinary Courts are there-
fore easily able to deal with it. Nowhere in India, not even in areas
specially notified, are we making offences triable by courts martial.
We are indeed shortening the criminal procedure by dispensing with
committal proceedings and by withdrawing the right of appeal but
in its substance the trial before the Commissioners will not differ materially
from the trial before- Magistrates and Sessions Judges. For a right of
appeal, we substitute the safeguard of trial by a Court of three Commis-
sioners, of whom at least two sball be persons who are judicial officers of
experience, or are persons qualified under section 2 of Indian High
Courts Act for appointment as Judges of a High Court, or are advocates
of a Chief Court or pleaders of ten years' standing. It is not intended
jinywhere to supersede the ordinary criminal courts in respect of the ordi-
nary crime of the country but merely to provide a speedy tribunal for
particular cases, or cases of a particular class with which the ordinary
courts are unable to cope. The Judges of the Chief Court of the Punjab
have themselves authorised the Lieutenant-Governor to say that, in
the opinion of the Judges, the ordinary judicial machinery will not be
equal to dealing with the heavy cases, which the outbreak of lawlessness
in parts of that province has entailed. Furthermore, the greatest check
upon the spread of crime of this kind is the prompt punishment of the
offenders. It is only the procedure that we are shortening ; the law "of
evidence is not affected, except inHhe one particular specified in clause 9,
which finds a parallel in the Act of 1908. The Council will readily recognise
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 77
that the ordinary machinery of law and order in this country is based
upon the average volume of crime ; when crime increases considerably, that
machinery is strained ; if the increase is still larger, the machinery may break
down. Justice is proverbially slow, and the system which has grown
up in this country by its nature interposes so large an interval between
crime and its punishment that the ordinary procedure is quite unequal to
the suppression of violent crime whenever crime threatens to become of an
epidemic character.
Although, therefore, the special procedure which is created by the
Bill may extend to more offences than is the case in England, yet that
procedure is in itself much less drastic than that adopted in England. It
will extend only to limited areas, and to limited cases in notified areas.
Except tor these limited cases in limited areas, the ordinary courts will
continue to deal over the whole of India with ordinary crime, including
even such stray offences against the rules which may happen to be
committed in other parts of the country. It will be obvious that no
Local Government will wish to refer more cases to special Commissioners
than is clearly necessary. If they were to swamp the special courts with
cases, they would be frustrating the very objects of these special sections.
I submit, My Lord, that this procedure in no way goes beyond the
necessities of the case, and that no loyal and peaceful citizen need feel any
alarm at the introduction of this legislation. If there is any alarm at
all felt in this country, it is the alarm caused by the manifestations which
I have already described, and the taking of any measure that my be calcula-
ted to secure the suppression of those manifestations is likely to diminish
that alarm.
I move for leave to introduce this Bill in the confident hope that it
will receive the full support of this Council
The Kon'We Lieutenant Colonel Raja JTai Chand :— My Lord, I
fully realise the necessity of this Bill and have not a single word to say
against it. I accordingly support it with all rny heart.
The Hon'We Sir Gangadhar Chitnavis * * * *
Coming to the Bill now before us, drastic though the proposed legislation
is, I must support it. Exceptional circumstances justify extraordinary
measures. In times of the utmost gravity to the whole Empire like the
present considerations of individual rights have to be subordinated to the
higher considerations of the good of the State. The greatest good of the
largest number is the active utilitarian idea which underlies all legislation
and all rules of ordered society. The Bill should be judged by this principle.
The whole question is one of utility, of expediency; and Government
must be in the best position to decide it. And when they deliberately
come to the conclusion that the assumption of extraordinary powers is
necessary, we may accept it as correct ; we hold Government responsible for
the peace of the country and for our safety, not only from foreign aggression,
but from internal disorder. If for the due discharge of that responsibility
larger powers be necessary, they cannot in fairness be withheld. It
is possible of course, to hold different views about the expediency of the
particular measures suggested, but in view of exceptional situation, it is,
78 DEFENCE OF INDTA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT,) BILL, 1D15,
in my humble opinion, to our interest not to stand out for the methods
• that appear most agreeable to our personal ideas. I would accordingly
support this legislation, although it means a serious, if not a dangerous,
addition to the restrictive laws we have enacted during the past few years,
subject to the modification as regards details suggested below. It must
however, be remembered that this is mainly a war measure based upon the
peculiar circumstances of this country, and that in these times in
jthe United Kingdom also special legislation of this kind has been found
necessary. These all are points in favour of the Bill .
But My Lord, it causes one a pang to think that such legislation has at
All become necessary. When in September last I moved in this Council
the resolution, expressing tmr unswerving loyalty to the Throne and our
determination to participate in the cost of the war, little did I dream that
the situation in any part of India would ever be so bad as to cause anxiety
to Government. My Lord only the other day we reiterated our protesta-
tions of loyalty in this very Council, and our sentiments were as genuine
BS earnest then as in September last. The whole country was with us on
the second occasion as on the first. And yet before three weeks are out,
disquieting reports have been received about the situation in certain parts
of the country. I would fain distrust them , I would fain believe they are
greatly exaggerated. But, My Lord, we are passing through critical times,
•and sentiment has to be put aside. If Government do err, it is much
rather they should err now on the side of over- caution. Despite of my
support to the Bill, I would, however, request Your Excellency to note
that I do not for a moment concede that the great heart of the nation
Is anything but sound.
My Lord, though I support the principle, yet I think that some amend-
ments in some particulars are essentially necessary, and may be wisely
made without detriment to its main -object. I would recommend that in
summary trials capital punishment should, as far as possible, be avoided
whenever the object of Government can be served by imprisonment or
transportation. It would have also been much better if the Government
could have seen their way to eliminate from the Bill trial of certain minor
offences regarding life and property now included in the Bill.
Another recommendation that I wanted to make was that the law
should not have retrospective effect.
I would have pressed these amendments, but with the assurances given
by Your Excellency this morning, it will ill-become me to press them.
We were all glad to hear from Your Excellency this morning that there is
no one more zealous to maintain the honour of India than yourself. Your
Excellency's past career has shown that you have been India's best friend,
and I am sure that India's interests are safe in your hands.
My Lord, the details ot the Bill, apart from its principle, as I have
already made it clear, has my support. We cannot forget that even
nfter that dastardly attempt upon your life when Your Excellency
suffered terrible agony, Your Excellency commanded that you would not
like people to be harrassed on suspicions only. This must bring home to
the people that if this legislation is found necessary by Your Lordship,
it is because the situation is quite exceptional, and should be treated in
an exceptional way. We doubt not that this new law, as said by Your
Excellency this moruiug, will be put into operation with as much euro
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 79
and thoughtfulness as the other repressive laws have been in Your Excel-
lency's time. I hope my countrymen will also so conduct themselves as
to enable the authorities to allow the law to remain a dead letter and to
enable Government to withdraw the measure from the Statute-Book as
early as possible. My Lord, I regret the urgency of the measure prevents
its being sent to select Committee.
With these few words, I beg to support the Bill.
The Hcn'TDle Sir FazaTblioy Curriniblioy :— My Lord, I rise to
support the Bill now before the Council. I do so, not that I particularly
approve of drastic enactments and retrograde laws, much less that I like
to see my countrymen deprived of the right of trial by the ordinary
courts, or of their heritage — a trial by Jury. My Lord, the Bill has my
support for the sole reason that 1 feel honestly convinced that at a moment
of grave national crisis like the present one, political rights of the
individual must give way. The one desire of every Indian is to help the
Government to the" fullest extent to prosecute this war to a victorious
termination, and any support that this Bill may receive here to-day, is
I am sure, the result of that sincere desire.
I will not go so far as the noblo Marquess of Lansdowne in his speeds
in the recent debate in the House of Lords on Lords Parmoor's Bill to
amend the Defence of the Realm Consolidation Act, in maintaining that
J would be ' prepared rather to risk even an occasional miscarriage of
justice ', but 1 am entirely at one with his Lordship in thinking that
emergency measures like the Bill now under discussion 'must involve-
some interference with the privileges to which the country attached
the greatest importance and which it venerated and cherished very
dearly, and that in times like these we must be prepared to part, if
necessary, with some of these privileges for the public interest required
it/
It might be argued that we are far from the scat of War. As a
matter of fact we are. But it must not for a single moment be forgotten
that the fortunes of Great Britain in this war nre onr fortunes, and this
is a time, above all others, when it must be right that the troubles and
anxieties of Government should be looked upon by my countrymen as
their very own.
My Lord, I have listened with deep interest to the lucid pronouncement
just made by Your Excellency arid I hope 1 am indulging in no idle
hyperbole in assuring Your Excellency that your cares and your worries
are shared by all right-thinking Indians and Lave our unstinted
sympathy. The gallant deeds of our Indian soldiers in the field and
the willing sacrifice of their lives amply prove this.
My Lord, I admit that sub-clause (1) (c) of clause 2 and clause 3 have
occasioned in my mind no small measure of anxiety. They appear to
my lay mind of far too sweeping a nature, but I feel confident that even
at the moment of greatest emergency and excitement the Executive and,
more especially, the Judiciary may be fully trusted to preserve a balanced
and dispassionate mind and not to mix up purely civil offences, and thab
great care and the utmost hesitation will be exercised in putting these
clauses into force where there is the remotest trace of the offence being
80 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL I*AW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915-
of an essentially civil nature. Clause 3 appears to cover many common
crimes which come at present within the purview of the Code of
Criminal Procedure and the Indian Penal Code, but I have full faith that
under Your Excellency' s argus eye none of these will be permitted to
come under the scope of the Bill. Capital punishment also, especially in
case of a difference of opinion among the Commissioners, appears
unnecessary. The purpose of the Executive can be served by transportation
of the accused. I do not think everything has been said or can be said
of the reasons which have impelled Government to introduce this Bill,
but I hope that, if without impairing the efficiency of the measure in
the least, Government can in any way modify the clauses likely to operate
harshly on the people they will do so as of all things I should like to
see the Government assured of the co-operation of the people in an
unprecedented enactment of this nature. I give my support all the more
willingly as we are assured that the Bill is to have currency during the
continuance of the war and only for six months after.
" One word more and I am done. One dreadful thought has obsessed
my mind all throughout yesterday and to-day. My Lord, I earnestly
trust that this Act, in after days, will not be used against us as an
argument by interested parties whon the time for granting the promised
concessions to India arrives. I view with dismay the opposition already
presented in the House of Lords to the proposed concession of granting
an Executive Council to the United Provinces. My Lord, your opening
remarks have greatly relieved tny anxiety, as Your Excellency assured
us that this Act will in no way mir the goad name of India, and we
implicitly trust to Your Excellency's statesmanship to save us from
that. With these few words I support the Bill. "
Tho Hon'We Mr. DadaTalioy :— My Lord, I feel I should not give
my silent vote in favour of this most unwelcome Bill, and yet I find it
difficult to express my feelings adequately on this occasion. I am weighed
down with an overpowering sense of duty, duty to my constituents and
duty to Government. By my oath of fealty and allegiance I am bound to
exercise all my influence and all my power for the promotion of considered
schemes of legislation designed to strengthen the position of Government.
At the same time I owe it to my constituents, I owe it to my beloved
country that I should be watchful of the interests of the people as well
and not be a party to any measure which has ^he effect of interfering
unnecessarily and to an inconvenient degree with their constitutional
rights, rights secured to them by Royal Proclamation and despatches,
and a long series of benevolent legislation. Ordinarily, there need be no
conflict between the two interests, but occasions do arise at times when
the faithful discharge of both the duties is a matter of exceptional
difficulty. My Lord the present is one of those occasions, and the action
of a non-official Member is liable to be misconstrued.
The Bill marks another stage, and a stage of grave moment, in repressive
legislation. We have already a number of special Acts of this Council,
more or less comprehensive in scope, which one would think sufficient for
all executive purposes. Two of them, at any rate, the Indian Crimes Act
of 1908 and the Indian Conspiracy Act of 1913, are of a drastic nature,
and we have yet to learn that they have failed in their purpose. Another
law on the top of them all, still, still more drastic and still more
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915, 81
restrictive, certainly justifies a searching examination of the whole position, ami
the non-official Members of this Council would in ordinary circumstances have
reason to hesitate to associate themselves with it. But the present is an exceptional
situation. With war raging in Europe with the British Empire as a belligerent
party much against her wish, and in view of the unscrupulous methods of the
enemy, Government has got to be trusted about the expediency of exceptional
legislation of a temporary character. My Lord, I do not feel myself competent
to judge of the exigencies of the situation. Government has serious information
which is necessarily withheld from the public, and if upon such information
Government claims additional powers, I would not take upon myself the heavy
responsibility of witholding my support. From the necessities of the position,
the whole responsibility of the fresh legislation practically lies with Government
and the non-official Members share in it upon trust. We must confide in Govern-
ment in the times of stress and emergency, we only act upon trust, in implicit
faith and the purity of the motives and the judgment of Government, with the
sole intention of maintaining Government in sufficient strength to deal adequately
with the situation. It is stated that a new situation has been created in certain,
areas which cannot be promptly and effectively dealt with under the existing law.
We do not know much about it ourselves even after the somewhat exhaustive
statement made by Your Excellency and the Hon'ble Home Member, and we are
not competent to form any decisive opinion one way or the other. We have not
got here a Government like the one they have in England, and no legislative
measure, however emergent, is passed by Parliament in such great hurry. But us
it is, we are ignorant of the true state of the facts, and this is not the time for
speculation. I feel myself thus bound to accord my support to the general
scheme of legislation proposed, in the belief, founded upon the offici-xl statement
that it is absolutely necessary in these exceptional times in the interests of law
and order and for the good of the country.
My Lord, my action on this occasion has another, and a more powerful,
spring. We have had during Your Excellency's regime two legislative Acts of
a repressive character, and the care with which they have ao far been worked
induces the hope that the proposed law will be enforced only when such enforce-
ment becomes unavoidable. Your Excellency's presence at the head of affairs
affords an ample guarantee that the large powers now assumed by the Executive
will not be misapplied. My Lord, it is this conviction, it is thU belief, that has
influenced my vote to-day more than anything else.
But all said, My Lord, the legislation cannot be agreeable to any Indian. I
am glad as Your Excellency said to-day it will not be regarded as a slur on the
people. It is a matter of melancholy reflection that, after our loyalty has evoked
the admiration of the world, any of our countrymen should have been guilty of
any conduct which has created in the country a serious situation, so much so th at
the responsible Government feel themselves powerless to cope with it satisfactorily
except by an abnormal extension of powers and by the supersession, by a court
of extraordinary jurisdiction, of the ordinary courts of law. But my Lord, it is
only human to err, and it is sincerely to be hoped that the errors of the few will
not be visited upon the whole nation. In the hour of victory one can afford to
be generous, and I fervently pray that when success has finally attended British
arms and the war is over, this legislation will not be used to frustrate our
legitimate hopes and aspirations.
My Lord, I do not for obvious reasons subject the provisions of the Bill to a
critical examination, but before I resume my seat I beg to point out some of the
features of the Bill which appear to me unnecessarily severe. We must never forget
that the court that will be constituted under the new law will be final, and have
extremely summary powers. It is only fair therefore that its jurisdiction should be
limited to only such offunced us are likely to jeopardiso tho State, But a careful
82 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915,
perusal of the Bill will show that almost all offences of a more or less serious
nature, even though not having the least bearing upon the war or upon the
conditions introduced by the war, will be triable by the Commissioners, in superses-
sion of the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts. Offences like theft even, if aggra-
vated by previous convictions, rape, dacoity, forgery, and defamation come within
the purview of the proposed legislation. It nay be that it is not intended that
the law should be put into operation in such cases, but when there is the chance
of its operation being so extended to offences which can be adequately dealt with
by the ordinary courts, uli principles of legislation justify the observance of greater
strictness in drafting. Every enactment should express clearly and unambiguously
the intention of the legislature, and every word in any provision must be taken
to have been used deliberately. Clause 3, sub-clause (1) requiies theiefore
considerable modification, with a view to prevent the Commissioners from assuming
a jurisdiction whioh it is intended they should not have. Any assurance from
Government that the operation of the law would be limited to particular offences
or classes of offences will not cure the defect I have just pointed out. Surety,
the ordinary courts cannot be supplanted by this extraordinary conrt.
My Lord, I have a few small suggestions to make. In clause 2, sub-clause
(I) (h), the intention of Government seems to be to prevent effectively all
attempts at interference with recruiting for the Army and the Police, but the
language is capable of a wider interpretation. There is nothing to prevent a man
being tried by the Commissioners for advising any relation of his not to accept
service under Government as clerk. This is obviously not the intention of the
legislature. The dissuasion referred to in the clause must expressly relate to
military service.
I do not also think that powers .of this extraordinary nature should be
exercised by Sessions Judges of one year's standing. We must have more
experienced men to do this sort of Judicial work. It is an accepted principle of
Judicial administration that sumniniy powers be exercisable by officers of
experience only. When the scope of the summary jurisdiction is extended
reasons of prudence will counsel even a greater strictness in the matter of the
qualification of the judicial officer. I accordingly suggest that Sessions Judges,
of at least tnre« years' standing only, should be eligible for appointment as
Commissioners.
Clause 5, sub-clause ("2) provides for the contingency of disagreement in
opinion among the Judges, but £ submit that it should further be provided that,
in the event of such disagreement taking place in the trial of any offence punish-
able with death, capital punishment must not be inflicted. In such cases at least
the benefit of the doubt can be so far given to tho accused as to prevent "execu-
tion, The difference in opinion denotes the existence of a reasonable doubt
about- the guilt of the accused, and it is the barest justice to him that he should
not undergo the extreme penalty of the law. Under the law as it stands at
present, capital sentence passed by the most experienced Sessions Judge has to
be confirmed by a High Court bench ot two Judges, but the decision of the
Commissioners is to be final in the Bill. It is therefore all the greater reason
that some such safeguard as mentioned above should be put in. My Lord, I aUo
pray that this Act should not have retrospective effect. At a later stage I shall
propose some small necessary amendments. My Lord, I offer you our grateful
thanks for placing this Hill in our hands a day before its introduction in this
Council.
The Hon'tle Mr. Abbott :— I give this Bill my full and whole-hearted
support, as I am satisfied that Your Excellency's advisors have just and sufficient
reasons for bringing it before this Council. The time has now come for us, the
non-official Members, to act up to the loyal resolution we all so heartily supported
iu September last,
DEFENCK OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 19l5. 83
The Hon'Wo Maharaja Manindra Chandra ITandi ;— My Lord, in
view of the fact that this measure is intended to to arm the Executive with
certain special temporary emergency powers requisite to secure the public safety
and the defence of British India, and that it will be in operation during the war
and for a period of six months thereafter, I beg to support the Bill before the
Council. I recognise that the Government have brought forward this measure
tc meet a grave emergency, and as such, it is entitled to our loyal support. My
L«jrd, I h tve no doubt that the greatest care and caution will be taken in the
actual application of this measure, and that it will subserve the special purposes
fur which it is being enacted.
ThO Hoa'blO ItfCr- GrllUSIiavi : — My Lord, I have not the least hesitation
in supporting the principle of the Bill which haa just been introduced in this
Council by the Hon'ble the Homo Member. At the outset I desire to express my
thanks to Government for having postponed the introduction of this Bill till
to-day and for having given us an opportunity to acquaint ourselves with the
contents of the Bill before we came into this Chamber this morning. If I am not
mistaken the practice that prevails in England in the House of Commons at an
emergency liko this is to introduce a Bill in the House without previous circulation
to the Members.
The advantage of the procedure, adopted in this instance L trust, will be
fully borne out ; for on reading section 1, clause 4, where it is stated that " this
Act shall be iu force during the continuance of the present war and for a period
of 6 months thereafter," ought to have the effect of inducing even those of our
colleagues who are always ready to criticise any and every Government measure
to give their unstinted support to a measure of this kind which at the very outset
is purported to be only a temporary one. My Lord, we are in the throes of at
most hideous and a terrible war. Ever since tho dawn of civilisation, nay, even
in pre-civilised times throughout the history of mankind there has never been
a war such as thin, which has demanded and is demanding an appalling toll of
human life, and which has already had the effect of decimating in hundreds,
thousands and tens of thousands tho flower of civilised manhood in the heart of
the boasted civilisation of the West, In this world-struggle our glorious
Empire has been plunged and in this guerre a la mort England has had to
unsheath her sword in defence of honour and in the interest of a loftier
civilisation against the barbarous hordes of the Germanii of the times of Julius
Ccosar. From all corners of our 'Empire our fellow citizens have marched forth in
defence of England's prestige and England's causo. Nearly eight months have
rolled by, yet the struggle goes o a in terrible intensity and unparalleled ferocity,
and no one is yet able to foreshadow the end. No one can therefore deny that
the exigencies of tho times are such that must call forth extraordinary measures.
In England, the Defence of tho Realm Act has already been passed< and it is only
proper that here a similar measure should bo taken and that without delay, and
the Executive should be given more power to deal promptly and effectively with
circumstances that may arise in the defence of India and tho Empire at large.
Therefore my Lord, I trust there will not be found a single member in this
house who will hesitate a single moment in giving his whole-hearted support
to a measure of this kind which has for its justification the needs of the hour in
the defence of our realm.
My Lord, this Act seems to have, howover, a twofold object, the first object
being as I have already endeavoured to delineate, namely immediate measures
that may be necessary owing the exigencies of the war, and the second
object being the stamping out of lawlessness, sedition and anarchy which have
unfortunately found their way — may I say from the West— into this otherwise*
peaceful and peace-loving land of the East to tarnish the fair name of Hind. It
shouid be a matter of extreme regret to all of us that this lawlessness instead of
receiving a check from the repressive measures that have already had to be passed
84- DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
is still growing apace and is still breaking out into various fantastic and undreamt
of ways. Well I remember how we all regretted two years ago that during the
very first session of this Council in the new Capital cf India, this historic city of
Dehli which is yet I hope destined to eclipse her former glories, it should have
liocn iuund necessary to introduce another measure, I mean the Criminal Law
Amendment Bill of 1913. During the passage of that Bill, while it met with
unanimous support from the majority of all of us, it at the same time met with
considerable opposition from one or two members, of whom at least one 1 am
sorry to find is not present to-day. The opposers, of that Bill at the time painted
in glowing colours what the terrible effects of it would be, and to what an amount
of abuse it would be put in the hands of the Executive, especially of the police
•who have always enjoyed the distinction of being the butt of a considerable
timouut of adverse criticism. When the police go out of the way and commit
an abuse of their powers, I have ever been and always am ready to draw the
attention of Government to their misdemeanours. At the same time, I would
desire my friends who are habitually opposed to them to remember that they are
officers of Government who have to carry their lives in their hands, and whose
duties are about the most arduous that can be imagined. Robberies, dacoities,
murders are constantly in the air, and it is a matter of great misfortune that a
section of our people, however infinitesimally small, has become utterly irrecon-
cilable and wedded to the idea that terrorism is the surest way to the progress
of the country, I must therefore emphatically assert that amid terrorism liberty
only dwindles, and liberalism is doomed to decline, and it behoves every man of
education, every true lover of his country, to take a share in the fight against an
' evil which is small enough at present, but which if it were allowed to grow
without being checked, its consequences will lead to most undesirable develop-
ments in the future. The recurrence of these deplorable crimes is certainly
the greatest evil that confronts the party of Indian reform of to-day. The
continuance of anarchical crimes is not less prejudicial to the people than to the
Government. It is indeed doubly cursed for it hardens the Government and
brutalises the people, and it leads to the gradual decline of liberalism, and it
is injurious both to Government and the people. It affects the people perhaps
far more adversely and prejudicially than the Government, and therefore it is tho
duty of our public men and of our public press to speak out and to stem as far
us it lies in their power the course of this grave evil. Every one who has the
real good of his country at heart must admit that the weapons which have been
forged in the legislative armoury have not proved to be sufficiently effective in
dealing with this evil. Criminals are apprehended, tLey are put on their trial,
the trial is prolonged from months to years, and in the end the tax-payer's
ironey is wasted, perhaps to no advantage at all. This is an aspect of the
question which certainly deserves our careful attention and which certainly
calls for some new kind of legislation which might stop this abuse. The country
has jnst lost one of hei greatest statesmen, I mean Gopal Krishna Gokhale. The
policy which he always endeavoured throughout his career to follow is the
policy which ought to commend itself to all our public men, and that policy was
association cum opposition so far as Government was concerned. If the interests
of his country and the interests of good government demanded that he should
associate himself with Government in any measures, that association was always
generous, frank and whole-hearted ; but when the interests of his country and
countrymen demanded that he should oppose the Government that he should
draw tho attention of Government to an error into which the Government had
fallen, then he never faltered for one moment in doing his duty to his country
and in raising his voice in no uncertain manner so as to explain to Government
•vhere tne error was ; that, My Lord, in my humble opinion, is the policy which
should commend itself to all lovers of our country. Criticism should always be
const motive, for not bin;.' is gained by destructive criticisms except waste of our
time and that of Government.
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 85
In times of war criminals are tried by court martial. In this instance a
special tribunal is proposed to be founded consisting of three Commissioners, of
whom one is to be a non-official and must be an advocate or a pleader of ten
years' standing. This is a safeguard which I heartily welcome. I would only
say that with regard to this I wish to suggest that in clause 4 (3) the the word's
* at least ' should be omitted so that in every special tribunal contemplated by
this Act, there shall always be present a non-official well versed in law. There
are other alterations which I should like to suggest. I would draw the attention
of the Hon'ble the Home Member to clause 3 (1) where it says that ' any person
accused of any offence punishable with death, transportation or imprisonment for
a term which may extend to seven years, may be tried by this tribunal. My
friend, the Hon'ble Mr. Dadabhoy has already pointed out that if this is left as
it is, it would mean that offences relating to counterfeiting of coins, voluntarily
causing grievous hurt, kidnapping, abduction and mischief 'and many others of a
similar kind will all come under the purview of this new tribunal. I would
therefore suggest that offences triable by this special tribunal should be clearly
denned.
I should also like to support my Hon'ble friend, Mr. Dadabhoy, in his sug-
gestion, namely that in clause 4 (8), where it is stated that ' All trials under
this Act shall be held by three Commissioners, of whom at least two shall be
persons who have served as Sessions Judges or Additional Sessions Judges for
a period of one year,' in place of ' one year ' at least * three years ' must be
substituted.
Tn conclusion, My Lord, I should like to express the hope that better sense
might yet prevail amongst the misguided ones in our country, and though this
Bill may be enacted into law, that it may yet remain a dead letter. With these
few words I gave my whole-hearted support to the introduction of this Bill.
The Hon'kle Rai Bahadur Sita Hath Bay :— My Lord, considering
the gravity of the situation and the emergency which has arisen and the dacoities
and murders which are being openly committed from day to day, in several parts
of Bengal, and even in the streets of Calcutta, I feel no hesitation in giving my
humble support to the Bill. I am sure that, under this Act, nothing will be done,
no steps not absolutely necessary will be taken which may go to create alarm and
stir up public feelings. Considering Your Excellency's broad sympathies,
and how jealons Your Excellency has always been not to take any action which
may go to cast a slur upon the admitted loyalty of my countrymen and upon
the fair name anc reputation of India, 1 am sure that the Act will, not be put
into operation everywhere and anywhere and unless it becomes absolutely
necessary. With these few words, I beg to give my humble support to the Bill.
The Hon'Tale Raja Kushalpal Singh :— My Lord, on behalf of the
large landholders of the province of Agia, whom I have the honour to represent
on this Council, I beg to give my cordial support to this Bill PI all its essential
features. This speech of the Hon'ble the Home Member leaves DO doubt in
my mind that effective action of the kind proposed by the Bill is imperatively
needed at the present juncture, In the present grave situation which has arisen,
in some parts of the country it is our bounden duty to lend every assistance in our
power towards the suppression of anarchy, violence and sedition. For exceptional
circumstances, exceptional remedies are required and are permissible. In view of
the serious actually existing evil, the extraordinary powers asked for by the Exe-
cutive cannot be withheld.
Nobody can deny that exceptional times like the present necessitate the
adoption of a more summary procedure and sharper methods than what are
suitable for ordinary times. We have the precedent of the English Defence of
liealin Act,
$6 DEFENCE OF IN IMA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915,
I sincerly hope and trust these measures will effectually extirpate sedition
?ind the anarchist propaganda, and that ere long the atrocious acts of lawlessness
•described by the Hon'ble the Home Member will become the things of the past
and and be nothing moro than matter for history.
ThC Hom'ljlO Ivtr DaS ' — My Lord, we passed the other day a unanimous
resolution, which was intended to l>e communicated to His Gracious Majesty, in
which we gave expression to the determination of the immense population of this
country to secure success in the war at any sacrifice, anil four Excellency was
pleased to communicate to this Council to-day the fact that this resolution was
communicated to His Majesty and read by him with pleasure. We have also
just received the news from Your Excellency that the Indian troops aro behaving
in a manner at the front which has won for them the admiration and praise
of European officers. It is really very painful, My Lord, that, at a time like
this, this Council should have been under the necessity of passing a Bill which
is of an emergent character and which has been demanded on account of the
gravity of the situation, the nature of wuich is known to Government,
Those people who at a time like this do anything which casts a slur on the
loyalty, the past history aird the traditions of the Indians are to be considered
as the worst of miscreants and in my opinion no drastic measure ought to be
considered as too severe for them. There is also, no doubt, from what has
transpired these last few years, that there is a class of men who are gathering
numbers round them, growing in numerical strength and perhaps in influence loo.
A measure of this nature as is before, the Council, a measure of this character ought
not to" be considered from our point of view only, but it has also to be looked at
from the point of view of that class of men whom I can best call our enemies,
From the fact that this class is growing by converts from peaceful citizens and
they are using ther influence to increase their number, anything in a measure of a
legislative character which is ambiguous or which is of such a nature as would give
them an opportunity to make people believe that this Government is of an
arbitrary character would be an instrument in their hands, which they would
use to their advantage. I have looked at the Bill from that point of view ; and
while I consider it my duty to give my whole-hearted support to the Bill, 1
should like the Hon'ble Member in charge of the Bill to look at it or certain
portions of th^ Bill from this point of view and see whether it is not likely to
be an instrument in the hands of our enemies and used by them as evidence
of the arbitrary power of the Government. One section provides that this special
Tribunal will try offences which are tried in the ordinary courts and are punish-
able under the Penal Code. I find that there is a provision for cases in which
punishment is ten years rigorous imprisonment and there may be cises of
criminal breach of property or ordinary cases of arson, and yet at the same time
I find that this clause does uot include cases of rioting which are more likely to
have a political aspect ; consequently, the section ambiguously or carelessly
worded as it stands would be considered by our enemies as an instance of
Government's object to have an arbitrary power in regard to ordinary offences
which are ordinarily triable in the ordinary courts. Another instance to which
the attention of Yonr Lordship has already been drawn is that the judge should
be one of longer experience than one year, and also that capital punishment
should not be awarded in cases when there is any doubt. But in the circum-
stances, as I consider that no punishment could be too severe for these men and
we have full faith and confidence that under Tour Excellency's Government this
Act will never be used in such a way as really to bring under its purview men
who are really friends and loyal subjects of the Empire, I do not consider it
necessaary to repeat amendments which have been made. I do really hope that
that the Hou'ble Member in charge of the Bill will take into consideration this
lact as to whether sec ion 3 might not be amended so as to give no occasion to
our enemies to consider it as evidence of the arbitrary power of the Government
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 191&. 87
and at the same time it should include those cases of rioting which are liable to
have a political aspect attached to them.
With these words, My Lord, I give my whole-hearted support to the Bill.
Ml- BanerjeO • — My Lord,l have listened with attention, I
may add with respectful attention, to the speech of the Hon'ble Member in charge
of tiiis Bill and to the speeches that subsequently followed, including the lectures
which my Hon'ble friend to the left* read to our public men who are members
of this Council. 1 will say this that I am not convinced as regards several of the
provisions in the Bill, and to my mind do not seem to be justified by tho
exigencies of the country or by naval and military considerations. Mj
Lord, we have been told and I accept the statement in an unqualified form, we
have been told the situation in the Punjab is grave and the tituation in Bengal
also is serious- though perhaps not to the same extent. The object of the Bill is
to impiove the situation. The end is one which will commend itself to all, no
matter to wh;it school of politics he may belong, for we know that order —
stable order — is the fundamental condition of all real progress. But when we
couie to consider the means to be devised for the purpose of attaining this object
differences ot opinion arise. My Lord, I say at once that so far as the provisions
of the Bill are concerned arising out of the war and relating to naval and military
conditions, it is the duty of every patriotic Indian to accord to them his whole-
hearted support, and I am sure that this will be the sense of the country.
But, .VI y Lord, the Bill traverses ground beyond military and naval considera-
tions, laises issues of a highly cjntroversiil character in regard to which many of us
will not be able to see ej e to eye with the Government. It has been stated
by the Hou'ble Member in charge of the Bill tha-t it is framed upon the
English Act. Well, in many respects it traverses beyond the English Act, and
I will mention one or two points, I am not considering the sections in detail,.
but section 2 creates an offence which is not to be found anywhere in the English
Act, namely, promoting feelings of enmiiy and hatred between different classes
of II is Majesty's subjects. That is a! tog the r new in this Bill ; it i?. nowhere to be
found in the English Act, and I think the Hon'ble Member in charge recognises
the fact.
Then, My Lord, there is section 3 which creates a particular tribunal and
la^ s down specifically the offences which are to be tried by that tribunal.
My Hou'ble friend in charge of the Bill has said that the tribunal in England
is the court martial : here tho tribunal is to be a Commission to be constituted
by the Locul Government. Undoubtedly tho provisions of the English Act as
regards this matter are far more drastic than the provisions of the Bill that is
before us. But, My Lord, an amendment was moved in 'the House of Lords
the other day — and I believe the underlying principle of it was-- accepted by the
Lord Chancellor and the Government, — under the terms of which, when
members of the civil population would be affected, they would have the right of
claiming trial by a civil court and by a jury. But what I desire to point
out is this, that it is only specific offences that are covered by the English Act,
whereas we have a large number of offences under the head of Public Safety
included in the Indian Penal Code which find a place here and which are to be
tried in a summary fashion by a specially constituted tribunal.
Therefore, My Lord, the contention that this Bill is framed upon the basis
and the model of the English Act is only '. correct in a qualified sense. It is
far more comprehensive than the English Act, and because it is so, I fear there
will be a great deal of agitation and controversy in the country regarding its
provisions.
* The Hon'ble Mr. Ghuznavi.
88 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
My Lord, reference has been made to the growth of anarchism iu Bengal, to
the recrudescence of crimes of violence in our province. My Lord, we, the
educated community of Bengal and the leaders of the moderate party, hold
anarchism in absolute horror and detestation, and we are doing what we can
to put it down so far as it lies in our power. On the 13th of this month we
held a Conference in the rooms of the British Indian Association, presided over
by the Maharaja of Burdwan and attended by many men of light and leading,
including a European gentleman who is the Principal of an important college
in Calcutta, My Lord, it was the unanimous sense of that Conference that
restrictive measures would not be suitable, and that they would aggravate the
situation. My Lord, that is the deliberate judgment of the people of Bengal,
We feel that the effect of restrictive measures in Bengal would be to add to
the uneasiness of the community and perhaps help the breakers of the law, who
would welcome them, What is needed is not new legislation, but greater
efficiency in the police. I freely admit that the efficiency of the police has been
added to and improved in recent years, but a great deal more remains to be
done. My Lord, it is the immunity of the offenders and the helplessness of the
law community who are defenceless and unarmed, that encourage these breakers
of the law in the perpetration of their foul deeds. I may remind the Members of
this Council that there was a formidable conspiracy soon after the outbreak of
Fenianism in London, the object of which was to blow up the public buildings
with dynamite. In one year's time the London police shadowed every conspirator,
hunted down the gang and the country was purged of the scourge. Of course
I know India is not England, but still, what we feel is that if the Government is
to deal with the outward symptoms of these unhappy developments, the efficiency
of the police has to be greatly improved. With regard to the root causes, My
Lord, they have to be dealt with in that spirit of conciliatory statesmanship for
which Your Excellency's Government has obtained a name and fame.
My Lord, I feel that in this matter the Government should have proceeded
by Ordinance. Your Excellency was pleased to refer to this matter in the
course of your speech. We of course bow to Your Excellency's decision, but
what some of us felt, what I at least felt, was this, that in this matter the
Government could not admit us into their fullest confidence, that they could not
perhaps disclose to us, in all their details, the information upon which their
judgment was based, and that therefore it was it impossible for us to record an
intelligent vote. That being so, I felt that it was the clear duty of the
Government to have assumed the entire responsibility of these measures by issuing
an Ordinance. However that may be, My Lord, we are grateful to Your
Excellency for the assurance which Your Excellency has given us to-day, that
the crimes of a few fanatics, and this law which Your Excellency's Government
thinks necessary to enact for their prevention, will not be regarded as a slur
upon our loyalty. I hope and trust that this measure will in practical operation
be administered with moderation and self-restraint. 1 hope and trust that it
will not be a weapon in the hands of the enemies of Indian advancement for
the purpose of blasting those prospects and frustrating those hopes which have
been roused in our hearts by the loyal devotion of of our countrymen consecrated
by their blood on the battlefields of Europe. For the faults of a few fanatics
the millions of our countrymen who are loyal to the core of their hearts should
not suffer.
The Hon'Wo Sir Ibrahim Rahimtoola :— My Lord, i think Your
Excellency will have, with your great gifts, realised the prevailing sentiment
amongst the non-official members of this Council in regard to this Bill. That
sentiment, Your Excellency, is unanimous in offering to co-operate and assist
in the passing of any legislation which Government may regard to be necessary,
under present conditions, and I am sure you will appreciate from the views to
which lion-official members have given expression, how whole-hearted they are
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 80
in their support of a measure to deal with the prevailing condition of the war.
However, we may disguise it, it is painful to reflect that any occasion for
legislation of this character should have arisen and that Government should nave
considered it necessary to bring it -forward for the approval of this Council.
There is one thing, however, which has clearly come out of the debate that has
taken place, and that is that while whole-heartedly in favour of any legislative
measure which may be considered necessary by Government to meet existing
circumstances in different provinces, the non-official members feel that the
provisions of the Bill need some alteration and amendment.
It is stated in the Statement of Objects and Reasons that this Bill deals
with two distinct classes of cases. The first is in regard to all military and
naval matters, or, more distinctly speaking, all matters in connection with the
war. Not only the non-official members of this Council, but, I venture to
think, the whole of the people of this country are willing to arm Government with
all executive powers by legislation which may be considered necessary to meet
the naval and military circumstances of the case. The Bill, however, essays to go
a little further than that and it deals with certain things other than can be
directly brought under the designation of * war measures. ' Even in regard to
that part of the Bill there is a concensus of opinion to support Government,
to enable them to deal with what the Hon'ble the Home Member referred to,
namely, the special circumstances prevailing in the Punjab and in Bengal,
but restricted to the lawlessness in the one case and dacoities in the other. I f
this measure was restricted to all matters in connection with the war and also
in regard to the lawlessness in the Punjab and the dacoities in Bengal, I think:
the whole Council would be practically unanimous in supporting Government
and when I see that that is the whole object with which this legislation is
introduced, according to the lucid explanation which Your Excellency
graciously supplied to the Council, and the speech which the Hon'ble the Home
Member has made, it appears to me that, so far as the principle underlying this
legislation is concerned, there is no real difference of opinion. It appears to
me however, that, in giving effect to the intention which Government have in
view in legislating in these two directions, the wording actually employed goes
much beyond it, and it is with some feeling of apprehension that I regard the
all comprehensive character of the provisions which are embodied in the Bill.
Your Excellency will observe that the first part of clause 3, sub section (1), deals
with matter relating to the war, while the second part is worded as follows : —
' Or accused of any offence punishable with death, transportation or imprisonment for
a term which may extend to seven years, or of criminal conspiracy to commit, or of
abetting, or of attempting to commit or abet any such offence shall be tried by Commis-
sioners appointed under this Act.'
Your Excellency can appreciate that there are grounds to apprehend that
powers conceded in words so wide and comprehensive may be exercised in
matters other than those for which the present legislation is being enacted,
and the reason why we consider it necessary to restrict the terms, of the Bill
specifically to the objects with which it is undertaken.
The preamble to the legislation says : —
• Whereas owing the existing state of war, it is expedient to provide for special measures
to secure the public safety and the defence of British India and for the more speedy trial
of certain offences. "
The objects of his Bill are here clearly indicated. I have already pointed
out, that so far as special measures to secure public safety and the defence
of the British Empire are concerned, there is absolute unanimity in this Council
Then as regards the more speedy trial of certain offences, offences which have
been indicated by the Hon'ble the Home Member in his speech, there is also a
practical unanimity. If that is so, Your Excellency, may I venture to suggest
that the wording of the measure be restricted to what Government themselves
90 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDtfENT^ BILL, 1915.
desire, instead of employing such comprehensive terms- as to embrace all such
offences as ought to be allowed to be tried in the ordinary procedure of the
existing law courts. Your Excellency, though the principle underlying this Bill
has been whole-heartedly supported, it has been clearly pointed out by many
members that there are certain provisions of the Bill which go much beyond the
intention with which this legislation has been brought forward. If that is so, I
do not know whether it would not be desirable to ask the Hon'ble Member to
consider whether he would not agree to so modify the provisions of this Bill as~
to restrict their application to offences contemplated by Government, and there-
by ensure the unanimous opinion of this Council in favour of the measure.
Sir, it need hardly be said that offenders coming either under the first part
of this Bill dealing with the war, or those who fall within the second classifica-
tion, namely, who are responsible for organized lawlessness and dacoities, can
have no sympathy from any quarter whatsoever, and it 'appears to me that if
there is any justification for an emergency measure to be carried at one sitting
in this Council, it can only be supplied by the fact that the requirements of
peace and order require summary treatment in the trial of special and extraordi-
nary offences. I do not think that it would be justifiable to provide in such
special legislation for any class of offences which ought ordinarily to be brought
before the existing law courts.
As I have already said, I wish to associate myself with my Honfble Collengnes
in supporting the principle of the measure the object of which is to provide
additional powers to the Executive Government for the purpose of de.aling with
the situation. I do hope that armed with the special powers which the present
legislation, with such amendments as may be made, will confer upon Govern-
ment, they will be able to prevent the lawlessness in the Punjab from assuming
epidemic form. I need hardly assure Your Excellency that the people of
India heartily desire to co-operate with .Government in their efforts to promote
the cause of peace and order.
The Hon'Tjle Paadit Madsn Mohan Malaviya:— My Lord, in the
course of the remarks which Your Excellency was pleased to make at the
beginning of this debate, you were pleased to tell us that the measure before the
Council is a war measure, and you were also further pleased to assure us that
no slur would be cast on the fair name of India by the passing of this measure.
In spite of this assurance from Your Excellency, some fears have been expressed
that the passing of such a measure as is before the Council may throw a
sort of reflection upon the loyalty of the people of India in general I have no
such fear. I am certain, My Lord, that the misguided action of a few young
men or old men, whoever they may be, will not, cannot, weigh in the balance
against the deliberate, deep-seated and pervading loyalty of the people of India
throughout this crisis. Hopes have also been expressed that, when the crisis
is over, the good that has been done by Indians will be remembered and the
evil perpetrated by a few will be forgotten. I do hope it will be so. But I
think, My Lord, that at this juncture neither fears nor hopes should guide our
action. I would ' trust no future howe'er pleasant,' would * let the dead past bury
its dead,' act firm ifl the living present, heart within, and God, o'er head.' The
living present demands from us that in the exceptional circumstances which
have been created by the war, we should lend our loyal support to the Government
in adopting every measure which is necessary in order to prevent and
crush mutinous acts, to preserve public peace and and to protect the civil
population, the law-abiding people, from the evils of the misguided action of a
few ill-balanced minds. We are all agreed, as the debate has shown, to the
principle of the measure so far as it is needed by the exigencies of the situation
for securing the public safety and the defence of the realm. But, My
Lord, while it is the duty of us, non-official as much as official members of the
Council, of rendering support to the Government in the emergency measure
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 91
which they find, in the special circumstances of the country, necessary to
«nact, it is also the duty of the Government strictly to limit the measure to the
requirements of the situation. Mention has been made of the fact that the
Defence of the Realm Act received the unanimous support of both parties
in the House of Commons and throughout the country in England. It rightly
did so, because the provisions of the Defence of the Realm Act were studiously
confined to the requirements of the situation created by the war. I am sorry
to say, My Lord — I say it with much regret, but I feel it my duty to say so — that
in framing the Bill which is before the Council the advisers of the Government
have not confined themselves to the requirements of the situation. I am sorry
to say, as many previous speakers have pointed out, that the framers of the
Bill have travelled much beyond the requirements of the situation ; and this,
My Lord, is the reason of the dissentient voices which have been mingled in the
speeches made before Your Excellency in offering support to the principle of the
Bill. My Lord, I will make my meaning clear. In the Defence of the Realm Act
it is laid down that " His Majesty in Council has power, during the continuance
of the present war, to issue regulations as to the powers and duties of the
Admiralty and Army Council, and of the members of His Majesty's forces, and
other persons acting in his behalf, for securing the public safety and the
defence of the realm ; and may, by such regulations, authorise the trial by
courts martial and punishment of persons contravening any of the provisions of
such regulations designed —
(a) to prevent persons communicating with the enemy or obtaining
information for that purpose, or any purpose calculated to jeopardise
the success of the operations of any of His Majesty's forces, or to
assist, the enemy ; or (and this was added by a subsequent Act) to
prevent the spread of reports likely to cause disaffection or alarm ;
(6) to secure the safety of any means of communication, or' of railways,
docks, or harbours ; or of any area which may be proclaimed by
the Admiralty or Army Council to be an area which it is necessary
to safeguard in the interests of the training or or concentration of
any of His Majesty's forces ;
in like manner, as if. such persons were subject to military law, and had on
active service committed an offence under section 5 of the Army Act ; and
may by such regulations also provide for the suspensions of any restrictions on
the acquisitions or user of land, or the exercise of the power, of making bye-laws,
or any other power under the Defence Acts, 1842 to 1875, etc."
Now, Your Excellency will be pleased to note that the entire power which
is given by the Defence of the Realm Acts, i and 2, is confined to enabling
the Admiralty or the Army Couucil to deal with cases where the public safety or
the realm may be endangered and to enable them to remove restrictions on the
acquisition or user of land which may be needed for military and naval
purposes.
My Lord, the Bill before us goes, as I have submitted much beyond the
provisions of that Act, I have no doubt not seen the regulations which have
been framed under those Acts. Last evening I requested the Hon'ble the Home
Member — I hope he will pardon my mentioning it — for a copy of these regula-
tions, but he could not spare it, I quite understand that he could not, and I do
not complain of it. I wrote this morning to the Hon'ble the Secretary to the
Legislative Department (who, I was told by the Hon'ble the Home Member, had
a copy of the regulations) asking for it, but he, too, said he could not spare
it. Now my Lord, we are in this position, that a copy of the Bill was
given us during the course of another debate here yesterday. We have
not been given a copy of the regulations on which we are told this Bill has
been modelled to enable us to arrive at a judgment in regard to the provisions
incorporated in the Bill. Aiid we must, therefore, act, according to the light
§2 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
which is within us. I feel that the regulations which have been made under the
Defence of the Realm Act cannot go beyond the clear provisions of that Act,
and judging from the clearly defined and strictly limited provisions of the Act,
we think that the provisions embodied in the Bill before us go much beyond
them. If, therefore, My Lord, there is this general note in the speeches of
non-official members to-day of desire to see changes introduced in the Bill,
and to have a discussion regarding some of its provisions, I hope it will not
be set down to any reprehensible wish on the part of the non-official members
or of those who have raised a dissentient voice or asked for some modification, to
unnecessarily oppose the Government. In the special circumstances in which the
Bill has been introduced we are all united in rendering our dutiful support to the
Government in all that is needed for the exigencies of the war. But we feel it
our duty as well to the Government as to the public to request the Government
to strictly confine the provisions of the proposed law to the needs of the situation, —
and not to allow, under the garb of a war measure, provisions to be enacted which
are not required by the situation and are likely unnecessarily to disturb the
public mind.
My Lord, there are a few points to which I will invite Your Lordship's atten-
tion. Beginning with the Hon'ble Raja Jai Chand and the Hon'blo Sir Gangadhar
Chitnavis, and ending with the last speaker, if 1 am not mistaken, every speaker
has asked that certain provisions should be revised.
The criticism may be classified under three heads : tbe scope of the measure,
the constitution of the special tribunals proposed, and the punishments to be
inflicted in certain cases. As regards its scopes, attention has been drawn to a
provision which, has been incorporated in section 3 of the Bill, by means of
which any person accused of any offence punishable with death, transportation
or imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, has been brought
under the purview of the present Act. Now, that practically abolishes the
provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code for the trial of these ordinary offences.
The Hon'ble the Home Member stated that it is not intended, and I do hope it is
not intended, that the ordinary law should be superseded for the trial of ordinary
offences, How, then, has this very important provision crept into the Bill, or
has been allowed to come into the Bill, which does in clear words supersede the
ordinary law for the trial of ordinary offences'?
In other respects also the Bill has been extended beyond the needs of the
situation, as some other members have pointed out, I may draw attention to one
other such provision. Under the English Act, as I have already said, the King in
Council may make regulations, among other purposes ' to prevent the spread of
reports likely to cause disaffection or alarm'. In the Bill before us rules may be
made to prevent tho ' spread of false reports or reports likely to cause disaffection
or alarm,' The words ' false reports ' have been put in. Now, My Lord in thia
country, with a -population so ignorant as it unfortunately generally is — with
the people not trained to such a degree as to be able to discriminate between
•what reports should be repeated and what reports should not be repeated,
a provision like this is likely to cause trouble and may possibly lead to
injustice. I hope the Hon'ble the Home Member will explain to ns why
it was necessary, having the precedent of the English Act before ns, to
introduce the words ' false reports ' into this Act. So much as regards tho
scope of the measure.
The second point of difference which arises from the debate is the constitution
of tho tribunals which are to be constituted under the Act* It has been
said on behalf of Government that tho provision of special tribunals of three
Commissioners is a much better measure than leaving Conrts Martial to deal
with persons to be tried under the Act. That, My Lord, is only one aspect
of the question, The other aspect is that Courts Martial could not possibly
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 93
be expected or called upon to dea,J with the numerous offences which have
been brought under the purview of this Act and made punishable under it,
and therefore the framers of the Act found it necessary to provide for special
tribunals of Commissioners appointed under the Act. There is reason,
My Lord, in support of the view that there is no clear necessity or justification
for creating special tribunals of the kind proposed by the Bill, and that special
benches, constituted under thg provisions of the Indian Criminal Law Amend-
ment Act of 1908,' would have inspired more confidence and ensured a more
satisfactory administration of justice. The constitution of the tribunals
proposed under the Bill is only in one respect, but in a material respect,
different from the constitution of the tribunals under the Act of 1908 to which
I have referred. Under the Bill at least two of the Commissioners may be of
much less experience than a Judge of the High Court, who alone can constitute
a Special Bench of three Judges under the Act of 1908. Your Lordship will
please note that several Members h"ve expressed the opinion that it would not
be right to allow Sessions Judges or Additional Sessions Judges who have
served only one year as such to be members of the special tribunals which
would deal with special offences under a special and somewhat summary
procedure. That much with regard to the constitution.
The third point to which attention has been drawn is the punishment of
death provided for certain cases. A sentence of death may be a proper sentence
in certain cases, and no one may object to this punishment being inflicted
under certain circumstances upon those who conspire against the King. But
when a summary procedure is prescribed for the trial of such cases, it does
seem to be a matter for consideration whether a sentence of death should not be
omitted from the category of punishments provided in such cases. Section 2
(2) of the Bill says-
Rules made under this section may provide that any contravention thereof or of any
ordeV issued under the authority cf any such rule shall be punishable with imprisonment*
for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both, or if the
intention of the person so contravening any such rule or order is to assist the King's
ay provide that such contravention shall be
punishable with death, transportation for life or imprisonment for a term which may
enemies or to wage war against the King, may provide that such contravention shall
punishable with death, transportation for life or imprisonment for
extend to ten years, to any of which punishments fine may be added.
Now, My Lord, to my mind it is questionable — I may be wrong, I speak
subject to correction — whether a person proved guilty of contravening any of
the rules made under this section, even with the intention of waging war
against the King, should not be regarded as a person deserving of worse treat-
ment than a man who has been openly fighting against the King's forces.
A prisoner taken in war is not shot down — not by our Government at any rate,
and I thank God he is not. A prisoner taken in war is interned, and will not
the ends of public safety and of justice be fully met if an offender of the type
we are considering is so interned, or transported for life, or imprisoned for any
term which the Court may think proper. My Lord, there is always a danger
of irrevocable injustice in the case of a death sentence. Such danger is
enhanced where the trial is more or less of a summary character. I may refer
here to the Pansey murder case, in which a man was ordered to be hanged by
the High Court of Madras, but was acquitted by their Lordships of the Privy
Council — a case in which my friend Mr. Eardley Norton rendered memorable
service to the cause of justice. There is also another case, the Mahta case of
Manbhum, where a person who had been sentenced to be hanged by the neck
until he was dead, and whose conviction had been upheld by the High Court
and whose appeal to the Local Government and the Government of India for
mercy had been refused was yet saved from the gallows by the truth being
disclosed by the very person in whose interest he had been convicted and
condemned. These, My Lord, are cases which have occurred in. this country.
In the House of Commons Lord Farmoor referred to the case of the German
8$ DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915,
Consul at Suuderland, who had been tried for high treason before a Judge and
Jury and convicted and sentenced to death, and in whose case the Lord Chief
Justice and other Judges had found unanimously that the crime had not been
proved. These cases afford us some guide and ought to make us pause to think
whether in summary trials it would be right to allow sentences of death to be
passed when iu such cases the injustice that may be done must be
irretrievable,
These are some of the points which have been troubling my Hon'ble friends
who have spoken before me, and these are the points which have troubled
me also. The result is that while we give our loyal support to the measure
as a war measure, in so far as it is necessary to meet the exigencies of the
war, we reque-tt Government to be pleased to have the measure thoroughly
considered in order that those provisions which are not necessary should be
taken out of it. My Lord, I see from the Agenda paper of the business before
the Council to-day, that it is proposed to ask for leave to have this measure
passed to-day. Yesterday we made a representation to the Hon'ble the Home
Member that the measure might be referred to a Select Committee in order
that it should be there discussed and that points of difference may be better
appreciated and understood. I hope that the request will meet with Your
Excellency's approval and with the acceptance of the Government and that an
opportunity will be given to the representatives of Government and the represen-
tatives of the people to sit down together to retain as much of the measure as
is needed, and as mnch as it is our duty to support at this juncture in view
of the war, and to remove such provisions as do not seem to be called for by the
exigencies of the situation,
With these words, My Lord, I give my support to the principle of the Bill,
and I hope that the Bill will be referred to a Select Committee and not passed in
its present form.
The Hon'We Raja Al3U Jafar :— M!y Lord, it is obvious that the present
state of affairs has rendered it necessary to provide for emergency measures,
and the Bill brought before the Council to-day is one of them. Considering
the unusual state of things which has been brought about by the present war,
no reasonable person will oppose the principle of this Bill (though there is some
difference of opinion as to some of its details). There was not sufficient time for
us to think over the details of the Bill in the usual manner, but the Government
cannot be reasonably expected to observe the ordinary rules of legislation on
such an extraordinary occasion. I believe there are circumstances that justify
such a measure. I have full confidence in the Government taking this action,
and I trust that the powers provided by the Act will not be misused by the
authorities entrusted therewith, and its application to the civil population would
be made with the utmost caution and deliberation.
It is clear from the provisions of the Bill that it is only a temporary measure
taken as a precaution against the exigencies of war, and it will cease to have
effect six months after the termination of the war.
Taking into consideration the emergency of the situation and the limited
duration of the measure, I think myself quite justified in giving my whole-
hearted support to it.
The Hon'ble Raja Sir Muhammad Ali Muhammad Khan =— My
Lord, I submit my grateful thanks to you for the manner in which you have
given expression to your feelings towards my country and my countrymen.
This is not a Bill that could enlist the support of any Indian in normal times,
I personally would regard it as a great misfortune if its provisions were con-
sidered necessary in ordinary times for governing a loyal and peaceful country
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 95
like India, for the provisions contained in the Bill are subversive of the wise and
beneficent methods of administration with which British rule is associated. It
is a serious matter, My Lord, to supersede the ordinary judiciary of the country
and to introduce sudden and revolutionary changes in the criminal law of the
country without consulting the people The Bill is highly drastic, and were it not
that we are going through critical and abnormal times and that the proposed
legislation is put forward as an exceptional and temporary measure. 1 would
have certainly opposed its passage through this Council. In the peculiar
circumstances, however, of the position of the Empire, I recognise that it is
not open to us to offer any opposition to the principle of the Bill ; but I am
gratified that our consent will not be regarded here or in England as an admis-
sion that India is disloyal or even lukewarm, for nothing can be more untrue ta
the real facts. My Lord, I refrain from opposing the principle of the Billr
because our Viceroy, who is beloved and trusted by the Indians and who has
unstinted confidence in them, has considered it essential to put forward the Bill
as a war measure only. My Lord, it is to be hoped that the Empire will soon
emerge from this struggle and that the Statute-book will not suffer for long
from the disfigurement which this legislation will inflict upon it. I also
sincerely trust since the Bill can obviously be a double-edged weapon, that
Your Excellency's Government will use the utmost care and vigilance to guard
against any misuse of its provisions by the local authorities concerned. I also
appeal to the Hon'ble Mover that he wauld give sympathetic consideration-
to the points raised by many Honrble non-official Members.
TkS Hoa'ble Maiing lYlye • — My Lord, speaking on behalf of the people
of Burma, I beg to give my full and hearty support to the Bill.
The Hon'blO Mr. Kayaningai :— My Lord, I sincerely support the Bip
in all its essential features, however much I may regret the circumstances which
necessitate its introduction. Though we cannot have an exact idea of the real
situation, we have the fullest confidence in Your Excellency's Government and
when the Government finds itself unable to cope with the situation, we must
co-operate with it in strengthening its hands My Lord, in a crisis like the present
we may, by shovVing any reluctance on our part in supporting the measure, be
doing more harm than good to our interest?. We want peace and order, and if
for the maintenance of peace and order an emergency measure is required, we
cannot but adopt it. That is the consideration, My Lord, which underlies
our vote to-day. We are taking upon ourselves a serious responsibility ; our
people's interests are in our hands, and when we support the Government in
this new measure, we do so in the fervent hope that the new law would be put
into operation in as few cases as possible, and that under the pressure of
extreme necessity. My Lord, J thing the Bill requires modificaton in a few-
particulars. I think that the provision which gives retrospective effect to the
law is unnecessary. I am also of opinion that capital punishment, except in
extreme cases, is too much. I would suggest, for the consideration of Govern-
ment, if clause 3 can be so amended as to be more acceptable. My Lord, we are
deeply grateful to Your Excellency for the assuring words which Your Excellency
has given expression to on this occasion.
The Hon'ble Sir Reginald Craddook :— My Lord, I feel sure that
Your Excellency will be gratified by the manner in which the non-official
members of this Council have supported the principle of this Bill. Neither we
nor they take any pleasure in putting forward and passing any drastic measure
of this kind As 1 explained in my opening speech, a long period has elapsed
before this step was found to be necessary, and Your Lordship has stated, to
which I need add no words of my own, that you do not consider that legislation
of this kind involves the slightest slur upon the loyalty of India. In a country
with such a vast population, there must lie some lawless elements; as long as they
keep quiet no drastic action is found necessary. When they begin to show signs
96 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915;
of disturbance, then public safety and security demand that action should be
taken to meet that attitude on their part. On the whole, I think that practically
every member has supported the principle of the Bill. Even in the case
of the Hon'ble Mr. Banerji, I was not able to gather for certain whether he
was actually opposing the Bill or merely giving it a reluctant support.
There were several points of criticism brought forward, and as regards
some of these if at a later stage they take the shape of specific amend-
ments, we shall be able to consider whether we can accept any of them, or if we
are unable to accept them, will be able to explain the reasons for non-acceptance.
As to the objection taken that clause 3 of the Bill extends far too wide the
scope of the Bill including, besides offences that would be created under clause
2, all offences punishable with death, transportation or imprisonment for a
term which may extend to seven years, in respect to that, the difficulty felt
was to find some comprehensive term which would allow offences punishable
under various Acts to be referred, if necessary, to a tribunal of this kind,
and a long schedule ot offences which even with much care might still fail to
comprise all the cases that it might be necessary to refer to the tribunal was not
considered a satisfactory method, because it is not merely a particular class of
offender whose speedy trial is required. Possibly, if some less comprehensive
term can be found to include all we want, the objection might be considered, but
I am not able offhand to give any assurance in this matter. I may just add a
few remarks with respect to one or two criticisms that have been made by the
Hon'ble Mr. Banerji and the Hon'ble Pandit M. M. Malaviya. As regards the
criticism against sub-clause (c) regarding the promotion of feelings of enmity
and hatred between different classes of His Majesty's subjects, the English
Regulation does not of course refer explicitly to that particular class of report,
We have generally followed Regulation No. 27, which runs as follows: —
' No person shall by word of mouth or in writing or in any newspaper, periodical, book,
circular, or other printed publication spread false reports or make/atee statements, etc., etc/
This — i.e., in regard to false statements — is one of the objections which the
Hon'ble Pandit Malaviya took to the wording of sub.clause (c) of clause 2 ; but
as regards the reference to promotion of feelings of enmity and hatred towards
His Majesty's subjects to which the Hon'ble Pandit took exception, I wish to
point out to the Hon'ble Pandit that the rules are intended to prevent the spread
of false and injurious reports ; and power is taken to make rules to prevent the
spread of reports which are likely, amongst other things, to promote feelings of
enmity and hatred between different classes of His Majesty's subjects. Now
in the circumstances of this country, it is natural that when dealing with the
public safety, we should safeguard the spread of reports that are likely to
endanger the public safety. The prevention of reports which promote feelings
of enmity and hatred between different classes of His Majesty's subjects is
essential as they may seriously prejudice the public safety.
I do not wish, my Lord, to go into further detail regarding the criticisms
that have been passed because they will be considered at a later stage ; I would
only ask that, as we have received such full support to the principle of the
measure, Your Lordship will put the motion to the Council.
The motion that leave be given to introduce the Bill was put and agreed to.
The Hon'blo Sir Reginald Craddook:— My Lord, I now beg to
introduce the Bill and to ask Your Excellency to suspend the Rules of Business to
admit of the Bill being taken into consideration.
Hi3 EzOOlleaoy the President :— I suspend the Rules of Business, and
I think that the most convenient method of procedure would he, when the motion
that the Bill be taken into consideration has been carried, to put the Bill to the
Council clause by clause under Rule 31. Each clause will then have to be dealt
with separately, and when the amendments relating to it have been discussed,
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 97
I shall put the question to the Council whether that clause stand as part of the
Bill.
The Hon'Tale Sir Reginald Craddcok :— My Lord, I beg to move that
the Bill be taken into consideration.
The motion w*>s put and agreed to.
The Hon'ttLe Sir Reginald Craddook :— My Lord, I beg to move that
clause I of the Bill do stand as part of the Bill.
The motion was put and agreed to.
The Hon'kle Sir Reginald Craddook:— My Lord, I now beg to
move that clause 2^%) stand as part of the Bill.
The Hon'"ble Mr. Dadabhoy :— My Lord, I beg to move a small amend-
" ment as regards clause 2 (A). Clause 2 (A) at present reads as follows :—
(h) to prohibit anything likely to prejudice the training or discipline of His Majesty's
forces and to prevent any attempt to tamper with the loyalty of persons in the service o£
His Majesty or to dissuade persons from entering the service of His Majesty.'
My amendment, My Lord, is that after the words * entering the' the word*
military or police ' be added. The object of this clause, as I understand it, is
not to prevent people from dissuading their friends and relatives entering the
service of His Majesty generally, but to facilitate recruitment ; and as I understand
that there is some opposition shown in some parts of the country in the matter
of military recruitment and also in- the recruitment of the police, this clause is
rendered indispensable.
My Lord, the non-official members of this Council are as anxious as the
Government that the recruiting in the country should not be in any way hampered,
or any impediment put in the way of recruitment both for the Army and for the
Police. But as this clause stands at present, there is a likelihood of it3 being
extended to other departments. If I have a brother, a son, or a nephew, and he
wants to become a munsiff or join the Educational Department, and if I dissuade
him from doing that, I may be hauled up aud brought within the pale of this
law. It is not the intention, My Lord, of your Government to bring these cases
within the Act. The intention is, I understand, to prevent undue interference
with the question of recruitment for the Army and the Police. The Police is, of
course, a civil department, but as this is a piece of legislation of an emergent
nature, I am prepared to agree that the word Police be also added, and I ani
sure the Hon'ble the Home Member will see his way to accept the- amendment.
The Hcn'TDle Sir Reginald CraddOCk : — My Lord, I may say at once on
behalf of the Government that [ will accept that amendment.
The question that in clause 2 (/*•), after the words ' entering the ' the words
* military or police ' be inserted was put and agreed to.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya i— My Lord, I propose
that in clause 2 (/) instead of the words ' public servants and other persons,' the
words ' District Magistrates, Sub-Divisional Officers or other competent military
authority ' be substituted.
My Lord, in the Defence of the Realm Act, as I have already submitted, the
special emergency powers conferred by the Act are conferred upon the ' competent
naval or military authority ', and the regulations which have been made under
that Act, a copy of which, thanks to the courtesy of Mr. Muddiman, I now have
before me, distinctly provide that the powers conferred by them shall be exercised
only by the competent naval or military authority. My Lord, the words ' public
servants or other persons ' used in the Bill before us aro extremely wide, the
98 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL IAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
whole object of tho war legislation ia to secure that the competent naval or
military authority, —
HiS Excellency the President :— Will the Hon'ble Member kindly
let me see his amendment ?
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :-Your Excellency
will pardon me. We have had to work against time. I have1 introduced the
wosds ' and other competent military authority ' in the amendment I propose. m
Hi3 Excellency the President :—You should have given notice of it
beforehand.
The'Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya:— i gave notice of
it this morning, as soon as I came here. My object is that the special powers with
which the Bill proposes to arm the Executive should be confined to District
Magistrates, Sub-Divisional Officers and any competent military authority. Thje
language used in the Bill is very wide, and, as I have submitted, there is no
sanction for it in the regulations which have been framed in the United Kingdom
in which the competent military or naval authority only is authorised to exercise
the special powers conferred by the Act. That ia my amendment.
The Hon'Tjle Sir Reginald Oraddook • — I am afraid that I cannot
accept the amendment on behalf of the Government A reference to tho
clause will show at once tlret the Governor-General in Couniil makes rules
as to the powers and duties of public servants and other persons in furtherance
of that purpose. The Hon'ble Mr. Malaviya at the last moment has inserted
in his amendment l or competent military authority * because he has recognized
that, but for that, he would be striking at the very root of the Bill which is based
on the Defence of Realm Act wherein Military and Naval authorities are given
such extensive powers. But, apart from that, is is aquestion of powers and dutie&
of all sorts of public officers. District Magistrates and Sub- Di visional Officers
may very likely be given powers and duties and so may many other officers ;
the police and even village-officers may have duties assigned to them ; and even
private citizens. Therefore it is quite impossible to accept the^amendment-
The amendment was put and negatived.
The Hon'ble Mr. Banerji:— My Lord, I beg to move that after
clause 2 (/) (c) tho following proviso be added -. — Provided that the latter pirt of
clause (c) beginning with the words 'or to ' in line 4, up to the end,, be not given
efiect to in any province except by a voto of the local Legislative Council.' My
Lord, I might have moved for the deletion of this part of the clause because
these words are a reproduction of the provisions of sections 153 (a) of the
Indian Pen-il Code. I need not read that section. Then, as regards offences,
committed by newspapers, we have a similar section in the Press Act.
Therefore, t might have move I far the omission of these wor.ls altogether.
But I find that there is a desire in the Punjab for spaedy procedure
in daaling with these maters. Therefore, My Lord, I h*ve ventured to put
in the proviso that f have read out, so that in case local opinion should
support the Government in adopting this procedure then only they should be
empowered to do so. The object is, to some extent, to have the action of the
Executive Government- controlled by the authority of local opinion, so that
nothing should be done u:ider the provisions of this section except, with
the consent of the local legislature. la my province the local legislature
undoubtedly has a non-oTi :ial mijority ; bub lam a member of the Bengal Legisla-
tive Council, and I havo !;mn there for the last two yeirs and more, and I find,
that only on ono occasion was the Government defeated. During the whole of
that time every measure of the Government, every Resolution, that tho
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 10 K>. 99
Government supported was carried, and every Resolution which it oppo.sed was
lost. Therefore, really* there would be no risk whatsoever, but, on the contrary,
some slight association of the local representatives with the operation of a
measure like this would, I think, tend to facilitate the administration of this
law. With these words, I beg to move the amendment.
The Hon'fcle Mr. "Wheeler:— My Lord, I venture to think that this
amendment is not one which should commend itself to this Council or be
accepted by Your Excellency's Government. It overlooks tho whole fundamental
basis of section 2, and, considering that the condition which necessitates the
passing of these rules do not differ materially in different parts of the country,
it would be a most curious and unusual state of affairs to have an act declared
to be an offence in one province and not in another. Neither are the particular
matters with which the rules will deal confined within provincial boundaries,
while there is the third objection that nothing could be more prejudicial to
the speedy disposal of offences, which it is sought to secure by this measure,
than having to wait until the approval of the Legislative Council in any oue
province could be obtained before a particular rule was enforced.
The amendment was put and negatived.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lo»d, i do not
press my first amendment to clausie 2 (7) (c) that the words " False reports
or ' be omitted from the first line. I beg Your Lordship's leave to withdraw it.
The amendment was by permission withdrawn. »
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, I move
.that from clause 2 (c) the words ' or to promote feeling of enmity or hatred
between different classes of His Majesty's subjects ' be omited. I do not
think, My Lord, that there is any need for any special provision of this kind
in the emergency measure before us. There is already sufficient provision in
the existing enactments to deal with a case which might arise under the clause
in question. I therefore move that these words be omitted.
The Hon'Tale Sir Reginald Craddook :— My Lord, I cannot accept
this amendment on behalf of the Government. Before the adjournment
I made some remarks on the subject in answering the " Hon'ble Pandit's
speech. This particular kind of report, .viz., one which is likely to promote
feelings of enmity and hatred between different classes of His Majesty's
subjects is no doubt not a kind of report which would be very common in
England, and, therefore, the English Act did not take cognizance of such
reports. Bnt there is no kind of report in this country which is more likely to
bespread than the one mentioned in this clause, and there is no kind of report
which is likely to do more harm and damage, and possibly excite more
breaches of the peace than a report which is likely to promote feelings of
enmity and hatred between different classes of His Majesty's subjects. There-
fore, My Lord, I submit that this is a very proper inclusion in this clause
among the reports which we wish to check, and that ihu amendment therefore
cannot be accepted.
The amendment wa's put and negatived.
The Hon'Tale Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, I beg
leave to withdraw iny amendment to clause 2 (1) (e), that after the word,
' purposes ' the words, subject to the payment of compensation,' be introduced.
The amendment was by permission withdrawn.
100 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL,
The Hon'tle M^ Bauer JC9 : — 1 beg to move this proviso to clause 2,
sub-clause (1^ (/) :r—
c Provided that a person feeling aggrieved at such an order may appeal to the Commis-
sioners appointed under section 3, or the District Magistrate or the Chief Presidency
Magistrate of Calcutta, as the case may be,'
The object of this proviso is to give the right of appeal to a person who
feels aggrieved —
His Excellency the President :— Are those the words in your motion
as submitted to the table ?
The Hon'ble Mr- Banerje© :— No, My Lord, I have added the words,
" Chief Presidency Magistrate or the Mngistrate of the District." I had
a consultation with Mr Muddiman ^Deputy Secretary to the Government of
India in the Legislative Department), and I put in these words to meet a legal
difficulty. The text, as before Your Excellency, reads as follows : —
' Provided that a person feeling aggrieved at such an order may, where section 3 to 11
of the Act have been extended to any area, appeal to the Commissioners appointed under
section 3.'
That, My Lord, is my amendment. The object of the proviso is to give a
person feeling aggrieved at an order of internment the opportunity of submitting
his case to a competent tribunal in order to have the facts tested upon which i h©
internment has been ordered. And this is only a matter of fair play and
justice to an individual who has been subjected to this disability. 1 understand
that this proviso is not in the English Act. But, My Lord, we have not been
following the English Act section by section or clause by clause. We have
been making some departures in a restrictive direction. 1 think we may make
one in a liberal direction also.
Hon'IplO Mr- Wheeler : — I venture to think that there is some
misunderstanding underlying this amendment. In the form in which it has
been moved it would not be workable. The Commissioners to whom the
Hon'ble Member has referred will be appointed for the trial either of an offence
committed by a breach of the regulations or of the other wider offences which
have been made cognizable by the tribunal. It might very well happen,
and would ordinarily happen, that at the time an order was passed under
clause (/) there would be no Commissioners in existence. It is quite contrary
to the whole spirit of the Bill to convert the three Commissioners into an
Appellate Court against the orders of executive officers, and would seriously
impede the passing of those orders, which is the object for which the Bill
provides. 1 would, therefore, oppose the amendment.
The amtndment was put and negatived.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, I bog
leave to withdraw the amendment to clause 2 (1). h, i.e., that the word,
military, should be inserted before the word, " service," as an identical
amendment has I, understand, already been accepted.
The amendment was by permission withdrawn.
The Hon'tte Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, I beff to
move that from clause 2 (2) the word * death.' be removed. I stated the reason
for this amendment earlier in the day. al think, My Lord, that iu cases where
there is provision made for a summary trial, it is desirable that the extreme
sentence should not be passed ; the ends of justice will be met by transporta-
tion for life or imprisonment for a term wiiioh may extend to ten years,
as the section provides,
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 101
The Hon5<ble Sir Reginald CraddOOk : — On the subject of this amend-
ment I think it is very likely that the cases will be rare in which a sentence of
death will be passed. But it would be a mistake to withdraw the power of
inflicting capital punishment, because there might be cases in which no other
punishment could adequately meet the crime. In the remarks that he made in his
speech this morning, the Hon'ble Pandit suggested that men who assist the King's
enemeis or wage war against the King ought to be treated like prisoners of war,
namely, enemy subjects who are fighting for their own King and who happen to
have been captured, This is a contention which it is. impossible to accept. The
prisoner of war is a subject of a foreign power who owes no allegiance to the
Sovereign of the country in which he is interned. But if a subject be found, in
contravention of those rules, to have either assisted the King's enemies or waged
war against the King, he is nothing but a rebel or a traitor, and all civilised
countries provide that in extreme cases the penalty of death may be inflicted on
such persons. Therefore, My Lord, we cannot accept this amendment.
The amendment was put and negatived.
The question that clause 2 as amended stand as part of the Bill was then put
and agreed to.
The Hon'*ble Sir Reginald Craddook :— I now move that clause 3 stand
as part of the Bill.
The Hon'Tale Mr. Surendra ITath Banerjee :— My Lord, T move that in
clause 3 (/), after the words ' in writing' the words 'subject to a vote of the
local Legislative Council ' be inserted.
The appointment of Commissioners is left to be decided by the Local Govern-
ment, which means the Executive Government. I am sure Your Excellency's
Government would like to have educated opinion associated with them in the
appointment of the Commission. If this is done, the work of the Commission,
by enlisting public opinion on its side, will be tacilitated.
It seems to me that no harm can accrue and there is no risk of friction or
collision. For in the local Legislative Gfemncil the Government will practi-
cally have its own way. The views of the Executive Government will nearly in.
all cases be accepted by the Legislative Council. It would be a distinct advantage
if the decision of the Executive Government were confirmed by the Legislative
Council. These are my reasons for submitting this amendment to the acceptance
of this Council.
The Hon'kle Ml- Dadabhoy:— My Lord, in connection with the considera-
tion of Mr. Banerjee's amendment, I take the liberty to place before the Council
a somewhat modified proposal. I would put my amendment in a form which I
have no doubt will be acceptable to the Hon'ble the Home Member. We have
heard a great deal this morning about this section and the great and sweeping
powers that this section allows. I think that, if my amendment is accepted by
Government, it will in a way allay the feeling that the Hon'ble Members here
as well as the public generally have, and it will also serve as an effective check on
the executive. I disagree with my friend the Hon'ble Mr. Eanerjee and propose
the following amendment, namely, that after the words ' Local Government ' the
words ' with the previous sanction of the Governor-General in Council be
added.
.The Hon'ble Sir Reginald Craddook— My Lord, I beg to rise to a
point of order. This amendment of Mr. Dadabhoy's has apparently no connec-
tion whatever with the amendment put forward by Mr. Banerjee.
Mr. Banerjee's amendment, as I understand it, is that in clause 3(1) the words
should run as follows : — The Local Government may, by order in writing subject
102 DEFENCE OF INi>IA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915,
to a vote of the local Legislative Council, direct that any person, etc. '
Well, My Lord, the whole scope of the provision is that wherever it is in force
in a province^ the Local Government may, finding disorder gaining ground, direct
the constitution of a special tribunal and direct that any person accused of a
serious offence which it is considered should be speedily tried, should be tried by
that tribunal. It is clearly a matter on which it is quite impossible for us to take
the vote of a local Legislative Council. It might not even be sitting, and in any
case it is quite impossible to refer individual cases to the consideration of a local
Council Therefore, My Lord, I cannot accept the amendment.
The amendment was put and negatived.
Mr. Dadathoy: — My Lord, I now press my objection. I
suggest that the words ' with the previous sanction of the Governor-General in
Council ' be added after the words Local Government. I have already said what I
had to say on the subject a few minutes ago. I have heard the Hon'ble the Home
Member who stated that the object of this legislation is to expedite matters.
That is a very important object, but in these days of rapid communication, railways
land telegraphs, the Governor-General in Council's order could be obtained within
a few hours, and I hope, therefore, the Hon'ble the Home Member will see his way
to accept this modest suggestion of mine. It will allay public feeling oa the subject.
The section is of a very drastic character. A lot has been said on it this morning,
and I do not wish to repeat what has been said, as it is still fresh in the minds of
Hon'ble Members. I therefore request the Hon'ble the Home Member to see his
way to accept this, and, as I said before, it will be a very valuable cheeck on the
Local Government, and it will allay public feeling considerably on the subject.
The Hon'WLe Mr. Rayaningar— My Lord, I support th§ Hon'ble Mr,
Dadabhoy's amendment.
The 3on'TDle Sir Reginald CraddOOk:— My Lord, I am very sorry, but
I cannot possibly accept this anieudtnemt In the first place, the Hon'ble Member
seems to overlook that section 3 can only come into force at all by notification of
the Governor-General in the Council. That being the case, the Local Government
will have had to establish a case to the^ satisfaction of the Governor-General in
Council that this procedure of speedy trial has become necessary within a part or
whole of a province. When once that is done, it is surely superfluous to require
the Local Gpvernment to refer every case, when they wish to send a criminal to
the special tribunal, for the orders of the Governor-General in Council. If a
Local Government is fit to administer its province at all, it can surely be trusted
to see that a special tribunal of this kind is used only for the cases for which this
Bill has been designed. It would cause much irritation and it would be quite.
impossible for the Governor-General in Council to dictate all the
circumstances that might make a trial of this kind desirable ; once the power
has been given to the Local Government on good case established, it would be
quite unreasonable to require the Local Government to apply for further
sanction from the Governor-General in Council. 1 am sorry that I must
oppose this amendment.
The amendment was put and negatived.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya:— My Lord, I beg to
move that from clause 3(1 ) the following words be omitted: — ' or accused of any
offence punishable with death, transportation or imprisonment for a term
•which may extend to seven years. ' My Lord, I fail to see why the insertion
of this clause is needed in this emergency measure. There is already
sufficient provision in the existing enactments of the country to deal with cases,
which may arise, of this character, and I hope that the Hon'ble the Home
Member will see his way at any rate to omit this clause from section
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 103
: — My Lord, I had the same amendment, arid
I thoroughly associate myself with the observations which have fallen from my
friend. A large number of cases, such as burglary, rioting and so forth, which
are included in the Penal Code, will be tried by the Commissioners under this
section and under a summary procedure, which I think would be dangerous to the
liberty of the subject ; there is no occasion for introducing this large class of casea
in this clause, and subject to a summary procedure in which there is some chance
of justice not always being done, I thoroughly associate myself wjth the
observations of Mr. Malaviya. "
The Hcn'tle Sir Reginald Craddock :— My Lord, the Government cannot
possibly accept this amendment, because it would strike at the root of the whole
object for which these speedy trials are designed. I mentioned in my opening
speech the various kinds of lawlessness which it was desired to suppress ; and
among those were outbreaks of lawlessness in which large bands of men plundered
whole villages, wrecked shops and destroyed houses and property. When gangs
of men go abroad in this manner they may commit very many different offences
under the Penal Code, and of course it would be impossible to make a scheduled
selection of offences that might be tried or might not be tried by this tribunal.
As a matter of fact although Hon'ble Members have chosen to describe this trial
as a very summary one, as if in fact it was a summary one under the Criminal
Procedure Code, the trial will d,iffer very little from the ordinary trial of warrant
cases before a Magistrate, or a sessions case before a Sessions Judge. It may
be that the evidence is not recorded in full detail, but all the other features will
be the same; and it would be quite impossible, therefore, to exclude these serious
offences from the jurisdiction of a special tribunal of this kind. If we were to do
so we should be taking away from a Local Government the power to deal with
those very cases for which it is specially asked for powers to be given under thia
Bill. I have already explained once that it was not intended to withdraw the
ordinary criminal business of the country from the ordinary criminal courts of the
country. And surely a Local Government may be trusted to- send to this tribunal
only those cases which it considers the ordinary courts are unable to deal with,
either because thay are choked with business or because the offences are so serioua
that the delays incidental to the ordinary hearing of cases would fail to check the-
outbreak of lawlessness. After thia explanation I feel sure that the Council will
agree with me that it is quite impossible to exclude these serious offences from thia
clause. The Government cannot acccept this amendment."
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan ICohan Malaviya :— My Lord, every
one of us desires that the wicked gangs to which the Hon'We V] ember has.
referred should bo got hold of as early as practicable ; but obviously what is needed-
for that purpose is better arrangements for their speedy arrests ; there is not the-
same need for a speedy trial,, for once an evil-doer is- arrested his mischievous-
activities are stopped. But the Act provides for a speedy trial ; everything that
the rlon'We Member has said has been in support of special provisions for a
speedy trial ; but as T have siid, once an offender is arrested a little delay in his
trial can lead to no injury to the cause1 of public peace or safety. The Hon'ble
Members says that if we take away this clause from, the B'<11, we shall be taking-
away the very power that the Local Governments most desire to be given to them..
I regret I do not at all see why the Local Governments should so particularly
desire to have this clause in the Bill. The Hon'ble the Home Menxber says that
ordinary courts are not able to deal with cases like this, that these courts are-
choked with business and that the disposal of such cases is unduly delayed. If that
is so, that is if the courts are choked with business, the remedy would appear to be
to. appoint additional Judges, and not the enacting of a drastic measure like the
one before us. If there is no other reason and no other than what has been
stated by the Hon'ble the Hom.3 Macaber for inserting the clause in question in-
the Bill, it seems to me that t'hafc object will be better served and can. only b@>
104 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
served by the provision of a stronger and better police and not for the speedy
trial which has been pro\7ided in the Bill.
I hope Government will reconsider the matter and see its way to drop the
clause to which, along with several other Hon'ble Members, I have drawn attention.
The motion was put and the Council divided with be following result : —
Ayes— 7.
* 1. The Hon'ble Mr. Ghuznavi. 2. The Hon'ble Pandit Bishan Narayan Dar.
3. The Hon'ble Pandit M. M. Malaviya. 4. The Hon'ble Sir * Ibrahim
Rahirntoola. 5. The Hon'ble Babu Surendra Nath Banerjee. 6, The Hon'bie
Raja of Mahmudabad. 7. The Hon'ble Mr. M. S. Das.
Noes— 46.
\. His Excellency the Commander-in -Chief. 2, The Hon'ble Sir Robert
Carlyle. 3. The Hon'ble Sir Harcourt Butler. 4. The Hon'ble Sir AH Imam.
5. The Hon'ble Mr. Clark. 6. The Hon'ble Sir Reginald Craddock. 7. The
Hon'ble Sir William Meyer, 8. The Hon'ble Mr. Hailey. 9. The Hon'ble
Mr. Gillan. 10. The Hon'ble Mr. Cobb. 11 The Hon'ble Mr. Brunyate. 12.
Tbe Hon'ble Mr. Wheeler. 13. The Hon'ble Mr. Low. 14. The Hon'ble Mr.
Sharp,. 15. The Hon'ble Mr. Porter. 16. The fcTon'ble Mr. Kershaw. 17. The
Hon'ble General Holloway. 18. The Hon'ble Mr. Michael. 19 The Hon'ble
Surgeon General Sir C, P. Lukis 20. The Hon'ble Mr. Russell. 21. The
Hon'ble Mr. Maxwell. 22. The Hou'ble M:»jor Robertson. 23. The Hon'ble Mr.
Kenrick. 24. The Hon'ble Mr. Kesteven. 25. The Hon'ble Sir William
Vincent. 26. The Hon'ble Mr. Carr. 27. The Hon'ble Sardar Khan Bahadur R.
J. Vakil. 28. The Hoi/ble Sir Fazulbhoy Currimbhoy. 29. The Hon'ble Mr.
Donald. 30. The Hon'ble Maharaja M. C. Nandi o! Kasimbazar. 31. The
Hon'ble Raja Abu Jafar of Pirpur. 32. The Hon'ble Mr. Maude. 33. The
Hon'ble Mr. Huda. 34. The Hon'ble Mr, McNeil), 35. The Hon'ble Rai
Bahadur Sita Nath Ray. 36. The Hon'ble Lieutenant-Colonel Brooke
Blakeway. 37. The Hon'ble Raja Kushalpal Singh. 38. The Hon'ble Raja
Jai Chand. 39. The Hon'ble Mr. Maynard. 40. The Hon'ble Mr. Walker.
41. The Hon'ble Mr. Dadabhoy. 42 The Hjn'ble Sir G. M. Chibnavis. 43.
The Hon'ble Lieutenant-Colonel G;mlon. 44 The H m'ble Mr. Arbuthaot. 45.
The Hon'ble Maung Mye. 46. The Hon'ble Mr. Abbott.
So the amendment was negatived.
The Hon'We ULl- Bauer jee : — My Lord, mine is the next amendment,
but as it covers the same ground, I beg leave to withdraw it.
The amendment was by permission withdrawn.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya •—" % Lord, I beg to
move that in clause 3 (1) for ' Commissioners appointed under this Act ' the
• following be substituted * Special Bench constituted in -accordance with the
provisions of the Indian Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1^08. '
My Lord, the constitution of special courts is proposed in section 4 of the
Bill, It is said that all trials under this Act shall be held by three Commis-
sioners of whom at least two shall be persons who have served as Sessions Judges
or Additional Sessions Judges for a period of one year, or are persons qualified
under section 2 of the Indian High Courts Act, 1861, for appointment as Judges
of a High Court or are advocates of a Chief Court or pleaders of ten years stand-
ing, The object evidently is to provide a court constituted by men with special
qualifications, possessing both experience and ability, and that is right. But I
submit that if instead of what is proposed in the Bill) the provisions of the
DEFENCE OF INDIA. (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 105
Indian Criminal Law Amendment Act for the constitution of a special Bench
of the High Court will be substituted, the Court before which offences made
punishable under the proposed enactment will go, will be constituted of three
Judges of the High Court, who would not merely fully answer the description
given in section 4? of the proposed Bill, but who would be much better qualified
by experience and ability to deal with cases of exceptional character. I think,
My Lord, the constitution of the Bench as I sugghst will inspire a great deal
more confidence and will remove much of the apprehension which may be felt
otherwise over the Act.
The Hon'lDle Mr. Wh©0l©r :— My Lord, the acceptance of the amendment}
would almost imply that a large portion of this Bill is not required, since the
Indian Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908, already stands in the Statute-book
and these tribunals which the Hon'ble Member seeks to introduce in this; Bill
can already be constituted, I think it is a matter of common knowledge thafc
special tribunal of the Criminal1 Law Amendment Act, 1908, has been very
sparingly used, and that when it has been used it has proved a somewhat
cumbrous machinery. It would absolutely frustrate the efficient administration
of the procedure contemplated by this Bill for it to be requisite to bring the
parties and witnesses to the provincial headquarters to be tried by a Bench of
three Judges of the High Court. There would never be enough Judges to sifc
upon such tribunals concurrently with the discharge of their regular duties.
and the expense and trouble to the parties and the delay involved would be
tremendous. Also, it would be out of all proportion to the requirements of the
efficient hearing of the sort of offences that will be brought before the three
Commissioners to hold that they should be brought in the first instance before
three Judges of Chief provincial Court. I regret, My Lord, that we cannot
accept the amendment.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Mklaviya-— My Lord; ai* that I
would say is that the result of the amendment that I propose would be to
constitute a Bench of three Judges who would be far better qualified by
experience and ability to deal with exceptional cases. My friend says there
are not sufficient Judges at present. Well, you have to appoint three Commis-
sioners under the Bill, I ask that instead of appointing three Commissioners
you should appoint three Judges who would fully answer the description given
in the Bill. If my am,3n Imenb were accepted, three Judges who are qualified-
to be Judges of the High Court or Chief Court would be appointed. It would
mean a. little extra expense, but a great deal more satisfaction- from the point of
view of Government and the public that justice will be done and that theie
should be provision against the miscarriage of justice so far as it is possible^
The amendment was put and negatived.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya!:— My Lord, I beg to-
move that in section 3 (2) the words * or in respect of persons or classes of
persons accused * be omitted. As it stands an order may be passed by the
Local Government regarding a whole class of persons to be tried under the Act.
There is danger that injustice may in suck cases, be done to any particular person;
who may fall within that class, and there would be no difficulty in the Govern-
ment issuing orders in every individual case as it may arise. If the words are
omitted it will result in this, that the Government will be able to pass orders
in every single case of a person or peraons whom it may be considered expedient
to try under the Act. I therefore propose that these words be omitted.
The Honlaie Sir Reginald Craddook : — My Lord, it is not possible
to accept this amendment because it is unnecessary to require that the case of
every individual man shall be reported to the Local Government before it passes
orders for bis trial by these tribunals. These cases are cgmmitted in various
106 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
districts, there may be large numbers of accused, and it is not a workable arrange-
ment that in respect of every man, some of whom might be artescted at various
times, special orders should be required. The wording of the section is
necessarily drawn so as to enable the Local Government to pass general orders
which would apply to the kind of cases for which it is contemplating this speedy
trial. I cannot see how in any way any class of persons can be prejudiced
because the order is given in a particular form. If for example, it was stated
that all persons of a certain class committing dacoity in a certain district should
be tried by the Commissioner, it certainly would not prejudice any of these
individuals. It merely enables the Government to deal with a type of a case
instead of dealing with every individual one when they find tbat the state of the
district requires resort to this speedy method of bringing offenders to justice,
I am, therefore, unable to accept the amendment.
The amendment was put and negatived.
The Eon'fcle Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, i do not
press the second amendment, viz that in clause 3 (£) -the words " or classes of
persons " be omitted, because as the first one has not been accepted this will not
be. I beg leave to withdraw it
The amendment was by permission withdrawn.
Hon'blO Mr. Banerjee : — My Lord, I beg to withdraw the amendment
which stands against my name, that is that in clause 3 (2) the words * or classes
of persons ' be omitted.
The amendment was by permission withdrawn.
The Honble Mr Banerjee •— My Lord, I beg to move that in clause 3 (3)
the words, « but, save as aforesaid, au order under that sub-section may be made
in respect of or may include any person accused of any offence referred to therein
•whether such offence was committed before or after the commencement of this
Act, ' be omitted.
My Lord, the effect of these words is to make this Act retrospective. A man
commits an offence to-day : two months hence, a Commission is appointed : he
will be tried by that Commission, and he will thus be deprived of those rights
•which, at the time the offence was committed, he undoubtedly possessed. Those
rights were trial according to the ordinary law and a right of appeal if he was
convicted as a result of that trial. All those rights will be taken away from him
although at the time when he committed that offence the Commission had not
been formed; To give retrospective effect to any legislation is a very unusal
proceeding, and I do hope that, in the circumstances, the Hon'ble Member in
charge of the Bill will see his way to accept the amendment which I have laid
before this Council.
The Hon'ble MP, GOmzaaTi :— My Lord, I beg to support this amend-
ment.
The Hon'ble Mr- "Wheeler : — My Lord, it might have been possible to
accept this amendment had Your Excellency's Government, with great prescience,
many months ago, foreseeing that circumstances might arise which would
necessitate this legislation, introduced and passed it then. But as was explained
by the Hon'ble Sir Reginald Craddock this morning, it has been the policy of
Your Excellency's Government to maintain the administration of the country
on the ordinary lines for as long as possible, with the result that this measure
is being introduced after the circumstances which necessitate its introduction
have actually arisen. There may be cases which have already occurred which
are of the kind to which it is desired to apply the procedure of this Bill, and
for that reason that clause was inserted, and it is submitted that it should
stand.
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 191$. 107
'The amendment was put and negatived.
The question that clause 3 stand as part of the Bill was put and agreed
to.
The Hon"ble Sir Reginald Craddook:-! now move that clause 4
stand as part of the Bill.
the Hcn'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya ••— My Lord, I beg
leave to withdraw the next amendment, namely : — •
1 That from clause 4 (2) the words ' class of accused ' be omitted.
The amendment was by permission withdrawn.
The Hon'ble Mr. GrhttZnavi :— My Lord, I desire'to move an amendment
which stands against my name. It is this, that in calause 4 (3) the words' at
least ' be omitted.
The reason why I move this amendment is as follows. As far as I have
been able to judge from reading this Bill and as far as I have been able to
gather the intention of Government, I take it that the Government intend to
create a special tribunal consisting of three Commissioners, of whom one shall
always be a nori-official. If therefore these two words ' at least ' are allowed
to remain, it will be possible in that case on some future occasion to
constitute a special tribunal with three official judges or three officials.
Therefore, if these two words are omitted, it will go a long way to reassure
the public outside this Council as well as perhaps some of my friends within,
this Council who are of the opinion that I occasionally read them a lecturo,
although I think that my lecture is always wholesome and on this occasion it
will do them good.
With these words 1 beg to express the hope that the Hon'ble the Home
Member will except this little amendment which I have moved.
The Hon'Tale Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord. I beg to
support this amendment Uhder the High Courts Act there is a provision for
the appointment of a certain number of Barrister Judges to every High
Court. Parliament has considered it desirable in the interests of maintaining
the best standard of justice, that this provision should be in the Act and this
has been in force throughout up to this time. The tribunal proposed under
the Bill is going to be a special tribunal, and it is highly desirable that there
should be provision tor the appointment in such a court of a lawyer who had
iiot served either as a Sessions or Additional Sessions Judge, and who would
therefore be either a person who is a barrister or a vakil practising indepen-
dently in the courts. From that point of view, it is very desirable that the
words ' at least' should be omitted.
The Hon'TDle Sir Reginald CraddOOk :— My Lord, the insertion of the
words ' at least' was intended to insure that two of the three persons who
constituted this Court— it might be all three— but at least two should be
persons who had some judicial experience, or were qualified as described in
Sub-clause (#). It may not always be possible to constitute a tribunal in
'which all three shall be judges who answer to certain tests of service or other
qualifications, and the number of judges available at any one time in a Pro-
vince are not so numerous as to make it possible to constitute a number of
these tribunals if all three Commissioners have to have these qualifications.
The Government, therefore, considered it to be a very adequate safeguard in
the constitution of these courts that at least two of these Commissioners
should be qualified in this way, and therefore they are not prepared to accept
108 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
an amendment of this kind if the intention of the amendment is that all three
should have these special qualifications.
The amendment was put and negatived.
The Hon/ble Mr- Dadadhoy I— My Lord, I beg to move that, in Clause
4 {3) for the words ' one year ' the words ' not less than three years ' be
substituted. I have very few words to say in support of this amendment, and
I do hope that this amendment of mine will commend itself to the Hon'ble the
Home Member who has very extensive administrative experience. I do not
desire to say anything more to-day on this subject than is absolutely necessary.
1 am firmly of opinion that when, under this Bill, summary powers have been
given to the three Commissioners, it is necessary that judges of experience
should be chosen. In clause 11, the last clause of this Bill, Hon'ble Members
will perceive there is a distinct provision that ' no order under this Act shall
be called in question in any court, and no suit, proseofttion or other legal
proceedings shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith
done or intended to be done under this Act.'
Hon'ble Members will therefore see what wide and extensive powers the
Commissioners will have, and it ia only right and proper that judicial
officers of experience should be on this Commission. My Lord, I myself have
been at the bar for many years; I have come in close contact with the judicial
work in my own province; and I for one would not trust Additional Sessions
Judges and Sessions Judges of one year's standing with this great work.
The Hon'tte Sip Reginald Craddook:— I may save time by
intervening to say that the Government are prepared to accept this amend-
ment and provide that the judges shall have these three years' experience which
the Hon'ble Mr. Dadabhoy desires.
The amendment was put and agreed to.
Tho Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, I beg to-
move that in section 4 (a ) the following words be omibted, — ' Of whom at least
two shall be persons who have served as Sessions Judges or Additional Session*
Judges for a period of one year (or three years as now).
The section will then run i —
' All trials under this Act shall be held by three Commissioners qualified under section
2 of the Indian High Courts Act, 1861, for appointment as Judges of a High Court or are
Advocates of a Chief Court or Pleaders of JO years' standing.'
My Lord, it is not surprising that the Hon'ble Member should have more faith
in members of the Service of which he is a distinguished representative than in
the members of the Bar. But, My Lord, a more sound rule than the one which
appeals to the Hon'ble Member prevails in England, where a large number of
appointments of Judges are made from among lawyers who are practising and have
practised for some time at the Bar. The result of the amendment which I propose
would be to secure a much better class of lawyers as Judges on the proposed Bench.
1 commend the amendment to the consideration of the Government.
The Hon'ble Mr. "VHieelei I — My Lord, I had hoped that after the accept-
ance of the Hon'ble Mr. Dadabhoy's amendment, which goes far to secure the
experience of the Sessions and Additional Sessions Judges who may be appointed
to this tribunal, this amendment might have been withdrawn. Its effect is to
further tie the hands of the Local Government, who may have to select Commis*'
sioners, to people of particular qualifications, and I think it should be judged
largely on its administrative merits. The section, as it at present stands, insures
the essential point that on the tribunal the trained judicial element will always
preponderate. That being so, it ia surely not au unreasonable measure of elasticity
E otf INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915 109
lo prescribe no special condition in respect of the third member. Should the
cases to be heard be numerous it may not always be administratively easy to find
the requisite two Commissioners of particular qualifications, and a certain amount
of discretion as to the person who can most suitably be appointed as third Cora-
missioner may well be left. With the safeguard of the necessary retention of the
judicial majority, the discretionary power as regards the third member can really
give little cause for complaint.
The amendment was put and negatived.
The question that clause 4 as amended stand as part of the Bill was then
put and agreed to.
The Hon"ble Sir Reginald Craddook :— I now move that clause 5
stand as part of the Bill,
The Hon'fcle 3?andit Jtfaelan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, I beg to
move that from the proviso to clause 5 the following words be omitted, inz., ' shall
make a memorandum only of the substance of the evidence of each witness exa-
mined, and ', 'The result of which will be that the proviso will stand thus :—
' Provided that su£h Commissioners shall not be bound to adjourn any trial for any
purpose unless such adjournment is, in their opinion, necessary in the interests of justice.'
My Lord, under section 9 a special rule of evidence is provided. That rule
of evidence is very much whst we find in the Indian Criminal Law Amendment
Act, section 13. The Legislature thought fit in passing the Indian Criminal
Law Amendment Act to lay down that ' notwithstanding anything contained
in section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the evidence of any witness taken
by a Magistrate in proceedings to which this part applies shall be treated as
evidence before the High Court if the witness is dead or cannot be produced, and
if the High Cottrt has reason to believe that his death or absence has been caused
in the interests of the accused '. This has been practically reproduced in section
9 of the Bill before us. But the Bill goes far beyond this in the proviso to
section 5. To lay down that the Commissioners shall make only a memo-
randum of the substance of the evidence of each witness, is I submit, unnecessary
and dangerous. The Commissioners may hear a case, and if they take down only
the substance of the statements of witness, they may, when they come to read
the evidence as a whole, miss some point which may lead to grave injustice.
I think, as no appeal is provided for, as the judgments of the Commissioners
are to be final and Conclusive, it is desirable that the evidence should be recorded
in full as it is required to be recorded under the Criminal Procedure Code.
The Hon'ble Sir Reginald Cfcaddock :— My Lord, the procedure
provided under section 5 is intended to facilitate a speedy trial, which is the
object of this legislation. The detailed record of evidence that is taken down
in our courts is taken down in full in order that the appellate court may have
the means of judging the facts upon that record. When, however, no appeals
are allowed from the decision of the court, it is clear that a very long and detailed
statement of evidence is not necessary. It has to be judged in this case by the
people who hear the evidence and who have to judge on a written record.
Therefore, to provide that the Commissioners should have the whole of the
evidence taken down in detail, would be to interfere considerably with the
object of the trial, which is to be a speedy one. No doubt, in practice, the
Commissioners would record such evidence as they thought proper in order
to assist their judgment in the case. But it is in accordance with the whole
object of this legislation to give them the option of making a memorandum only
of the substance of the evidence, and I think the discretion as to the exact
amount the Commissioners should take down in writing may well be left to
them.
110 DEFENCE OF INDIA. (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BtLL, 1915.
I am unable, therefore, on behalf of the Government, to accept thia
amendment.
The amendment was put and negatived.
Ml- DacLakhoy I —My Lord, I beg to move that in clause 5
(#) after the word ' prevail ' the following words be added ' But in no ease of
difference of opinion shall a sentence of death be passed.'
My Lord, the amendment which 1 now press upon the attention of the Council
is not purely a sentimental one. It is founded on the traditions of British justice ;
it is based on the wide principles of British justice ; it goes to the root, I say,
of British justice. In this case summary powers are given to these Commissioners j
they will have powers of life and death ; the inquiry which they have to make
will be of an extremely summary nature and character j they will not be bound
to observe fully the rules of evidence which Jthe Evidence Act imposes in ordinary
procedure. Even under clause 9 of the Bill very extensive powers have been
given to use the statement of a person who is dead or, whose disappearance or
incapacity to give evidence has, in the opinion of the Commissioners, been caused
in the interests of the accused. My Lord, I am perfectly aware that under the
Crimes Act the Special Tribunal enjoys a similar privilege j that is, in case of
a difference of opinion the judgment of the majority of the judges prevails, even
when a sentence of death is passed.
Bnt, My Lord, you can hardly compare the experience, the profound legal
knowledge of High Court Judges with those of the Commissioners that will be
appointed, and I therefore contend that it will be not quite safe for people
going up foi' their trial before these tribunals that in the case of a difference of
opinion the maximum penally of the law should be pronounced.
My Lord, the object of this legislation is doubtless a deterrent one ; but will"
its deterrent effect be taken away if, instead of the maximum penalty of the law,
a sentence of penal servitude for life is substituted ? My Lord, we are all desirous
of co-operating with Government in passing this emergent piece of legislation.
We have all shown this morning how anxious we are to help Government in this
crisis, in this hour of the Empire's need. But, My Lord, at the same time, I do
think that justice should be combined with clemency, and where there is a
difference of opinion between the Judges as regards the guilt of an offender, it is
in consonance with the principles of British justice, it is in consonance with the
ideas of all Englishmen, that the benefit of the doubt in that case should be given
to the accused, and the maximum penalty of the law should not be pronounced.
*
"With these words, my Lord, I request that clause 5 (2) be amended in the
way I suggest, which can be done without detriment to the provisions of this
Act.
Th© Son'Wo l&r. Das ' — My Lord, I support the amendment.
The Eoa:<blo Sir Ibrahim RabiBitopla : — My Lord, I should also like to
support the amendment. When the proceedings under this Act are going to be
largely of a summary character, I think it is very desirable that the extreme
penalty of the law should not be allowed whenever there is a difference of opinion
among the judicial officers charged with the trial of the cases, I trust that the
appeal which we are making to Your Excellency will be accepted and that the
extreme penalty of the law will not be awarded in cases in which the Commis-
sioners appointed uuder this emergency legislation are divided as to the guilt
of the accused
DETENCB OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 11 L
The Hcn'ble Sir G-angadhar Chitnavis :— My Lord, I support tho
amendment.
The Hcn'ble Sir Fasulbhoy ' Currimbhoy '•— J f«Hy endorse the
views expressed by the Hon'ble 'Mover and the other Members, and I support the
amendment.
The Hon'ble Z£y- Banerjee: — My Lord, I have given notice of the same
amendment and I thoroughly associate myself with the observations made by the
Hon'ble Mover. Here is a man tried under a summary procedure, and there
is no appeal for him against the sentence of the Commissioners ; and when there
is a difference of opinion there is always an element of doubt introduced as to
the soundness of a conviction. Under these circumstances, it seems to me to be
hard — almost unfair — to pass the extreme penalty of the law upon a man thus
situated. I hope, therefore, th it the Hon'ble Member in charge of the Bill will
see his way to accept this amendment.
The Hon'ble bandit Madan H&han Malaviya :— My JLord, i have
given notice of a similar amendment, and 1 beg to support the amendment before
us. My Lord, if the amendment is accepted the result will be that where out
of three judges one would be in doubt as to whether the accused was guilty or
not, in that case the accused will have, and he should have the benefit of the
doubt. That is a principle of English law for which Englishmen have justly
claimed great credit. We admire the system of English justice because of that
principle. I fear, My L >rd, that if the section 5 (2) of the Bill stands as it does
in the Hill, there will be a very great departure from the aforesaid established
principle for which there is no justification. I hope the Government will see their
way to accepting the amendment.
The Hon'ble Mr- Grhuznavi : — My Lord, I desire to endorse every word
which has been uttered by my friend Mr. Dadabhoy with regard to his amend-
ment. Justice should always be tempered with mercy in a case of this kind and
I hope that that Government will see their way to accepting the amendment.
The Hon'ble Sir Reginald CraddOCk' — My Lord, this amendment has
received a certain amount of support from several Hon'ble Members oi this-
Council, and I should like to view it sympathetically ; but I think there is to
some extent a confusion of ideas in this matter. The clause provides that, in the
event of any difference of opinion between Commissioners, the opinion of the
majority should prevail. That difference might be in respect of conviction ; but
the amendment bears no relation whatever to the question of conviction. No doubt
it is possible that in some cases one member of the Court might wish to give the
benefit of the doubt to the accused person, and the majority of the Court (*.e.y
the other two members) might find him guilty. It would be entirely contrary
to all the principles on whfch all tribunals are constituted that the opinion of the
minority should decide as to whether the man is guilty or not. Nor does the
amendment moved by the Hon'ble Mr. Dadabhoy actually amount to that,
although the arguments that "be put forward would appear to suggest that
that is what he really contemplates. In effect, what the amendment really
proposes is that, in the event of a difference of opinion, whether it be of
sentence or of conviction, no sentence of death should be passed. ^ Well.
there would possibly be some case for that if you took a hasty opinion on
it. At first sight it might seem a reasonable proposition. As a matter of
fact, under our existing law, a Sessions Judge may sometimes refrain from
passing a sentence of death, and it may be enhanced to a sentence of death by
a High Court. So that our existing law recognises that there may be a difference
112 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
of opinion about a sentence in which the opinion in favour of a sentence of deatb
shall prevail. Now, in this particular case, what may often happen may be
that there may be a conviction for murder, perhaps of an aggravated kind, and
the majority of the tribunal may consider that the capital sentence is the only one
which will meet the case. One of the Judges may think that the casa might be
met by the sentence of transportation. In that case of course the opinion of the
two must, in accordance with all precedent, prevail. But there is a very-
considerable safeguard in such cases, and in respect of that I would draw the
attention of the Council to sub-clause (2) of clause 8, where it is made quife
clear that the power of the Governor-General in Council or the Local Government
to make orders under section 401 or 402 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will
remain unimpaired by the Bill. Clearly, then, in such a case the accused person
who has been sentenced to- death would have a strong point in his favour in a
memorial to the Local Government and then to the Governor-General in Council,
that one of the members of the Court had not been in favour of inflicting the
death sentence ; and the fact that this third Judge had been in favour of the
more lenient course would be on record and would receive due weight from the
Local Government and from the Governor-General in Council. We consider,
my Lord, that the safeguards are ample to ensure that a man for whom the capital
sentence might be considered to be extra severe should have ample opportunity
of having considerations in his favour given weight to by the executive authority,
and that the existence of this safeguard renders it unnecessary to depart from,
all precedent in the case of these tribunals in such a way as to prescribe that the
opinion of the minority sh*ll prevail over the opinion of the majority.
I hope, My Lord, that the Council will rest satisfied with this explanation of
the case, and will feel re-assured that it is improbable that extra severity will ever
be exercised in the case of persons convicted of crimes by this procedure.
Til© HOU'WO Mr* DadaWlOy • — ^y Lord, I have heard with great
interest what the Hon'ble the Home Member had to say in reply to my amend-
ment, but, with great respect for his opinion, I beg to say that the Hon'ble the
Home Member is under some misapprehension as regards the interpretation of
sub-clause (2). In that clause a difference of opinion is provided for both as
regards the finding of the Court and the sentence to be passed by it. I am not
at present questioning the finding of the Commissioners. In the matter of
sentence only my amendment will apply. Clause 8 (2), no doubt, gives powers to-
the Local Government to interfere in this matter ; but my Hon'ble friend has
probably not noticed that this inquiry will be of a very summary nature. The
evidence that will be recorded will be brief, and the provisions of the Evidence-
Act and the Criminal Procedure Code will not be rigidly followed, "Will the
Local Government be in a position to form^ on such an imperfect record, their
decisive o-pinion on the case ? Who will be the best judges, the Commissioners
who heard the case, who heard the evidence and who recorded brief notes of the-
evidence, but who also had the opportunity of marking the demeanour of the
•witnesses, or the Local Government which has before it an imperfect record of the
case ? I submit, therefore, that the objection that has been raised to my amend-
ment is neither valid nor convincing. I appeal to this Council, to the Hon'ble
Members, in the name of justice, in the name of humanity, to accept my amend-
ment. As you are all aware it is a cardinal principle of British justice that a
hundred guilty persons may go off scot-free rather than one innocent man should be
hanged ; and I therefore ask you to give your support to this most reasonable
amendment. My Lord, I now request you to put my amendment to the vote.
The amendment was put and the Council divided with the following result :: —
Ayes— 16.
1. The Hon'ble Mr. Ghaznavi. 2. The Hon'ble Pandit Bishan tfarayan- Dart
3. The Hon'ble Pandit M, M. Malaviya. 4. The flon'ble Mr, H. B, Venkataranga.
DSFEtfCE OF INDIA (CRIMIKAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915, 113
5. The Hon'ble Sir Ibrahim Rahimtoola. 6. The Hon'ble Sir Fazalbhoy
Currimbhoy. 7. The Hon'ble Mr. Surendra Nath Banerjee. 8. The Hon'ble
Maharaja M. C. Nandi of Kasimbazar, 9. The Hon'ble Raja of Mahmudabad.
10. The Hon'ble Raja Abu Jafar of Pirpur. 11. The Hon'ble Mr. M, S. Das.
12. The Hon'ble Mr. Huda. 13. The Hon'ble Raja Kushalpal Singh. H. The
Hon'ble Raja Jai Chand. 15, The Hon'ble Mr. Dadabhoy. 1&, The Hon'ble
Sir Gangadhar Ghitnavis,
Noes— 36.
1. His Excellency the Commander.in-Chief. 2. The Hon'ble Sir Robert
Carlyle. 3 The Hon'ble Sir Harcoart Bufcler, 4. The Hon'ble Sir AH Imam.
5. The Hon'ble Mr. Clark. 6, The Hon'ble Sir Reginald Graddock. 7. The
Hon'ble Sir William Meyer. 8. The Hon'ble Mr. Hailey. 9. The Hon'ble
Mr. Gillan. 10. The Hon'ble Mr. Cobb. 11. The Hon'ble Mr. Bnmyate. 12. The
Hon'ble Mr. Wheeler. 13. The Hon'ble Mr. Low. 14. The Hon'ble Mr. Sharp.
15. The Hon'ble Mr. Porter, 16. The Hon'ble Mr. Kershaw. 17. The Hon'ble
Mr. Michael. 18. The Hon'ble General Holloway. 19. The Hon'ble Surgeon-
General Sir C. P. Lukis. 20, The Hon'ble Miv Russell. 21. The Hon'ble
Mr. Maxwell. 22. The Hon'ble Major Robertson. 23. The Hon'ble Mr. Kenrick.
24. The Hon'ble Mr. Kesteven. 25. The Hon'ble Sir William Vincent. 2G The
Hon'ble Mr. Carr. 27. The Hon'ble Mr. Donald. 28. The Hon'ble Mr. Maude.
29. The Hon'ble Mr, McNeill, 30. The Hon'ble Lt.-Col, Brooke Blakeway.
31, The Hon'ble Mr, Majuard, 32, The Hon'ble Mr, Walker. 33, The Hon'ble
Lt,-Col, Gurdon, 34, The Hon'ble Mr, Arbuthnot, 35. The Hon'ble Maung
Mye, 36, The Hon'ble Mr. Abbott.
So the amendment was negatived,
The Hon"ble Mr- Banerjee : — My Lord, I beg to withdraw the amendment
as regards this! particular section, namely : —
* That to clause 5 (3) the following worda be added, namely : — ' but in such
a case sentence of death shall not be passed,'
The amendment was by permission withdrawn,
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, I beg
to withdraw my proposed amendment to this section, namely, that to clause 5 (2)
the following words be added ; namely ; — ' But no sentence of death shall in suck
a case be passed/
The amendment was by permission withdrawn,
The motion that clause 5 stand as part of the Bill was then put and agreed to,
The Hon'ble Sir Reginald Craddook :— My Lord, I now move that
clause 6 stand as it is in the Bill.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, I beg to
withdraw the amendment, of which I have given notice, viz.t that the words' andi
conclusive 7 be omitted,
The amendment was by permission withdrawn.
The HOn'ble Mr. Banarjee :— My Lord, Ibeg to withdraw the amendment
as to clause 6 that stands against my name,
The amendment was by permission withdrawn.
The Hon'ble Mr. Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, I beg to move
that the last two lines of clause 6 (1 ) be omitted, viz, :—
' And no order of confirmation shall foe necessary in the case of any sentence passed by
them.'
114 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915.
Tito Kcn-'ble Sir Reginald Craddook s — My Lord, the last two lines
of clause 6 (1) that the Hon'ble Mr, Malaviya wishes omitted are * no order
of confirmation shall be necessary in the case of any sentence passed by them '
My Lord, if this amendment were accepted it would have the practical result;
of giving a power of appeal, because if the sentence is subject to confirmation it is
practicality impossible for the question of the guilt or innocence of a man to be
left out of consideration The Sessions Judge can ordinarily pass all sentences
except the sentence of death without confirmation and the Bill provides that
in lieu of the sentence of confirmation which is now required yon have a Court of
three Judges to decide a man's guilt or innocence and the propriety of the
sentence. The introduction of a conBrmation procedure would therefore strike
at thp root of the speedy trial procedure which the Bill is intended to provide,
and therefore it cannot be accepted by Government.
Hoa'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malariya:— My Lord, after ail
that the Hon'ble the Home Member has said it yet seems to me that there would
not be much loss of time caused by the adoption of the amendment proposed,
The accused would have been convicted by the Special Commissioners and if the
extreme sentence is carried out after fifteen days there Would not be any loss to
the cause of justice, In the case of a death sentence the accused ought to be
given an opportunity of having his case revised by the High Court because it may
Bometimes prevent a grave injustice. This, as I mentioned before, is what
happened in the case of the German Consul at Snnderland, in which the Privy
Council upset tha decision of the High Court of England who had convicted and
sentenced him to death. Cases of a similar miscarriage of justice ought to b@
provided against. Nothing would be lost by providing for them in this Bill,
The motion was put and negatived.
The Hon'We Paadit Madaa Mohan Malavijra : -My Lord, I move
that clause 6, sub-clause (2), which runs as follows, be omitted : —
' 6 (2) If in any trial under this Act it is proved that the accused person has committed
any offence whether referred to in section 3, or in any order under that section or not, the
Commissioners may convict such accused person of such offence and pass any sentence
authorised by law for the punishment thereof,'
Now, my Lord, this Act purports to provide for the trial of certain offences to
Tvhich a special significance attaches by reason of the extraordinary circumstances of
the war. But by virtue of this provision every offence of an ordinary nature, which
may be triable otherwise by the ordinary courts of justice is brought under the
purriew of this Act. Suppose a person has been tried for one of the offences
referred to in section 3 and an order is made sentencing him to 5 years' imprison*
ment ; and suppose that there is another offence of an ordinary kind of which he
has been guilty, If he is tried for this offence in the ordinary courts, he will have
the advantage of an opportunity of defending himself according to the ordinary
regular procedure which the law has provided, but if the Special Commissioners
are empowered to convict such an accused person of such an offence not falling
under the purview of this special measure, then the man is unjustly deprived of
the right of being tried for ordinary offences by the ordinary courts of law,
which the Hon'ble Member has told us this Act does not purport to take away,
My Lord, I submit that this clause should not find a place in the Bill, and should
be omitted.
Mr- WhOeler 1— My Lord, the sub-clause merely provides
for a point of procedure which may arise and enables it to be dealt without
prejudice to anybody. It frequently happens that accused persons are sent
before Courts on certain charges ; after hearing the evidence and weighing the
whole matter the Court considers that an offence, other than that charged, has
been committed and convicts of that. If the clause were omitted, and if the
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) BILL, 1915. 115
Commissioners were able only to convict a person of one of the specific offences
mentioned in the Bill, then if they are of opinion that the offence actually committed
is not specifically covered by the Bill, the whole proceedings would presumably have
to be re- opened, it may be before a Magistrate, and the accused instead of having
had one trial before three Commissioners of whom two must have had considerable
judicial experience, would have to be re-tried by a single Magistrate. That would
surely neither help the man nor benefit the cause of justice. I submit, My Lord,
that the clause is reasonable.
The amendment vas put and negatived.
The motion that clause 6 stand as part of the Bill was then put and agreed to.
The Honble Sir Reginald Craddook :— My Lord, I now move that
clause 7 stand as part of the Bill.
The motion was put and agreed to.
'The Eonble Sir Reginald Craddook :~My Lord I move that clause 8
stand • as part of the Bill.
The Hon*ble Mr. Banerjee :— My Lord, I beg to move the following
amendment, that in clause 8 (/) for the words 'and no Court' the words 'the
High Court alone ' be substituted. The effect of that would be to give a right of
appeal to the High Court in the case of the conviction of an individual. The
section takes away the right of appeal. Under my amendment it is proposed that
the right of appeal should be given. My Lord, the sentence in many cases
would be so heavy and the procedure fcso summary that it seems to me as a
matter of justice that there ought to be some authority to which an appeal might
be preferred. The High Court is the highest authority and, having legard to
this consideration, the summary nature of the procedure, and also to the absence
of the safeguards which are provided by the ordinary law, I submit that it is only
fair to the convicted person that he should have the right of appeal and that that
right of appeal, I recommend, should be exercised by the High Court.
The Honble Sir Reginald CraddOOk :— My Lord, the amendment
moved by the Hon'ble Mr. Banerjee is to substitute the words ' the High Court
alone ' for the words ' and no Court.' He argued that it was necessary to give
the right of appeal to the convicted persons in such cases, although, as a matter
of fact, his amendment would not have that effect at all. It would give certain
powers of revision to the High Court, and that is all. Well, My Lord, in
introducing the Bill and explaining the necessity for a speedier method of
administering justice, I dwelt strongly upon the necessity that there was that
punishment should follow quickly on the crime, and that all the proceedings
which are allowed in ordinary times to pursue their leisurely course, should be
quickened up. Therefore to give powers of revision to the High Court in cases
of this kind, or powers of appeal as the Hon'bla Member wanted, though his
amendment did not convey that, would be merely to once more introduce the
same kind of delay which by this legislation it is sought to avoid. I cannot
imagine anyone who has voted for the principle of the Bill supporting this
amendment. If the principle of this Bill is accepted, then the amendment
cannot possibly be accepted.
The amendment was put and negatived.
The motion that clause 8 stand as part of the Bill was put and agreed to.
The Hon"ble Sir Reginald Craddook :— Hy Lord, I now move that
clause 9 should stand as part of tho Bill.
The motion was put and agreed to,
116 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT j BILL, 1915,
The Hon"ble Sir Reginald Oraddook .—My Lord, I move that clause
.10 should stand as part of the Bill.
The Hon"bie Sffr Bauer j ee : — My Lord, I beg to withdraw the amend-
ment to clause 10 (ij) stands against my name.
Hie amendment was by permission withdrawn.
The Eon' We Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— My Lord, I also
beg for leave to withdraw my two amendments to clause 10 (11).
Both amendments were by permission withdrawn.
The motion that clause 10 should stand as part of the Bill was then put and
agreed to.
The Hon'Ue Sir Reginald Craddock'-— My Lord, I now move that
clause 11 should stand as part of the Bill,
Tfie motion was put and agreed to.
The Hon'ble Sir Reginald Craddook :— My Lord, I now move- that
the Bill be passed. It has been a source of satisfaction to the Government to
find how hearty has been the support accorded by the Council to this measure.
There have been points in it -upon which amendments have been suggested, and
in one or two cases we were able to accept those amendments. There were others
in which I should have been glad to agree to some of the amendments had it been
possible to do so without interfering -with the efficiency of the new law. 1 think it
is most gratifying to find how heartily and bow loyally — although the task is
never a pleasant one — the Hon'ble Members have conie to the help of Government
in this matter,
My Lord, in the course of the debate remarks have now and then been,
dropped which would indicate that some members have rather over-estimated
the character of the trial before these tribunals as being of a very summary
nature, and I should like to repeat and lay some stress upon it tl>at the law of
evidence in this case is not altered except in one particular, for which we have
a precedent in the Act of 1908, namely, that when a witness has clearly been
got rid of in order to avoid his giving evidence, then, any statement of his
recorded before a Magistrate may be put in as evidence. With that one exception
which, as I have said has a precedent, the law of evidence will continue to guide
these Special Commissioners in the trial of cases, and although the powers given
are drastic, yet, as most Hon'ble Members will, I think, readily admit, this
criticism has been levelled against mauy measures that have been brought before
our Councils, and in nearly every case — perhaps in every case — many of the
fears expressed at the time have been found to have been groundless. In the
administration of an Act of this kind they may rest assured that under Your
Excellency's direction the action taken will be not more stringent than the
necessities of the case warrant and I think that Local Governments may be fully
trusted not in any way to abuse this power of handing cases over to special
tribunals. With these remarks, My Lord, I ask that the Bill be passed,
The motion was put and agreed to.
The Council adjourned to Monday, the 22nd March, 1915.
DELHI : W. H. VINCENT,
The S6th March, 1916. Secretary to the Government of India,
Legislative
Received the assent of the Governor-General on the 19th
1915.
ACT IV OF 1915.
An Act to provide for special measures to secure the public safety and the
defence of British India and for the more speedy trial of certain
offences.
Whereas owing to the existing state of war it is expedient to provide
for special measures to secure the public safety and the defence of British
India and for the more speedy trial of certain offences ; It is hereby
enacted as follows :—
Short title, extent and 1- (1) This Act may be called the Defence of
duration. India (Criminal Law Amendment) Act, 1915.
(2) It extends to the whole of British India .including British Balu-
chistan, the Santhal Parganas and the district of Angul.
(3) This section and section 2 shall come into operation at once. The
Governor-General in Council may, by notification in the Gazette of India,
direct that the rest of the Act shall come into operation in any province
or part thereof on such date as may be specified in such notification.
(4) This Act shall be in force during the continuance of the present
war and for a period of six months thereafter :
Provided that the expiration of this Act shall not affect the validity of
anything done in pursuance of it and any person convicted under this Act
may be punished as if it had continued in force, and all prosecutions and
dflier legal proceedings pending under this Act at the time of the expira-
tion thereof may be completed and carried into effect, and the sentences
carried into execution as if this Act had not expired.
2. (1") The Governor-General in Council may make rules for the
purpose of securing the public safety and the
Power to make rule.s. j /? r c r» -L- i T T i .1
defence of British India and as to the powers
and duties of public servants and other persons in furtherance of that
purpose.
In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing
power, rules under this section may be made —
(a) to prevent persons communicating with the enemy or obtaining
inform ation which may be used for that purpose ;
(6) to secure the safety of His Majesty's forces and ships and prevent
the prosecution of any purpose likely to jeopardise the success of the
operations of His Majesty's forces or the forces or His Allies or to assist
the enemy ;
(c) to prevent the spread of false reports or reports likely to cause
disaffection or alarm or to prejudice His Majesty's relations with Foreign
Powers or to promote feelings of enmity and hatred between different
classes of His Majesty's subjects ;
(d) to empower any civil or military authority to issue such orders
and take such measures as may be necessary to secure the safety of
railways, ports, dockyards, telegraphs, post offices,works for the supply of
118 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) ACT, 1915.
gas, electric light or water, sources of water-supply, all means of communi-
cation and any areas which may be notified by such civil and military
authority, as areas which it is necessary to safeguard in the public
interest ;
(e) to enable any naval or military authority to take possession of any
property, moveable or immoveable, for naval or military purposes and to
issue such orders and do such acts in respect of any property as may be
necessary to secure the public safety or the defence of British India or
any par t thereof ;
(/) to empower any civil or military authority where, in the opinion of
such authority, there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that any person
has acted, is acting or is about to act in a manner prejudicial to the public
safety, to direct that such p3rson shall not enter, reside or remain in any
area specified in writing by such authority, or that such person shall reside
and remain in any area so specified, or that he shall conduct himself in
such fmanner or abstain from such acts, or take such order with any
property in his possession ^or under his control, as such authority may
direct ;
to prohibit or regulate the possession of explosives, inflammable
substances, arms and all other munitions of war ;
(h) to prohibit anything likely to prejudice the training or discipline of
His Majesty's forces and to prevent any attempt to tamper with the
loyalty of persons in the^service of His Majesty or to dissuade persons from
entering the military or police service of His Majesty ;
(i) to empower any civil or military authority to enter and search any
place if such authority has reason to believe that such place is being
used for any purpose prejudicial to the public safety or to the defence of
British India and to seize anything found there which he has reason to
believe is being used for any such purpose ;
O*) to provide for the arrest of persons contravening or reasonably
suspected of contravening any rule made under this section and prescribing
the duties of public servants and other persons in regard to such arrests ;
(k) to prescribe the duties of public servants and other persons as to
preventing any contravention of rules made under this section and to
prohibit any attempt to screen persons contravening any such rule from
punishment ; and
(1) otherwise to prevent assistance being given to the enemy or the
successful prosecution of the war being endangered.
(2) Rules made under this section may provide that any contravention
thereof or of any order issued under the authority of any such rule shall be
punishable with imprisonment for a term which way extend to saven years,
or with fine, or with both, or if the intention of the person so contravening
any such rule or order is to assist the King's enemies or to wage war
against the King, may provide that such contravention shall be punishable
with death, transportation for life or imprisonment for a term which
may extend to ten years, to any of which punishments fine may be
added.
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) ACT, 1915, 119
(3) All rules made under this section shall be published in the Gazette
of India and shall thereupon have effect as if enacted in this Act.
3. (1) The Local-Government may by order in writing direct that any
Power of Local Government Person accused anything which is an offence
to direct accused person to in virtue or any rule made under section 2, or
be tried by Commissioners. accused of any offence punishable with death,
transportation or imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven
years, or of criminal conspiracy to commit, or of abetting, or of attempting
to commit or abet any such offence shall be tried by 6 Commissioners
appointed under this Act.
(2) Orders under sub-section (I) may be made in respect of all persons
accused of any offence referred to in that sub- section, or in respect of any
class of person so accused, or in respect of persons or classes of persons
accused of any particular offence therein referred to or accused of any class
of such offences.
(3) No order under sub -section (1) shall be made in respect of or be
deemed to include any person who has been committed under the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1898, for trial before a High Court, or in whose case
an order for trial has been made under section 6 of the Indian Criminal
Law Amendment Act, 1908, but, save as aforesaid, an order under that
sub-section may be made in respect of or may include any person accused
of any offence referred to therein whether such offence was committed
before or after the commencement of this Act.
4. (1) Commissioners for the trial of persons
***&** appointed bytheLocal
Government.
(2) Such Commissioners may be appointed for the whole province or
any part thereof or for the trial of any particular accused person or class
of accused persons.
(3j All trials under this Act shall be held by three Commissioners, of
whom at least two shall be persons who have served as Sessions Judges or
Additional Sessions Judges for a period of not less than three years, or are
persons qualified tinder section 2 of the ludian High Courts Act, 1861, for
appointment as Judges of a High Court or are advocates of a Chief Court
or pleaders of ten years standing.
5. (1) Commissioners appointed under this Act may take cognizance
of offences without the accused being committed
Commis- to them £or tria^ au(^ jn trying accused persons
shall, subject to any rules made by the Local
Government in this behalf, follow the Procedure prescribed by the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1898, for the trial of warrant cases by magistrates :
Provided that such Commissioners shall make a memorandum only of
the substance of the evidence of each witness examined, and shall not be
bound to adjourn any trial for any purpose^ unless such adjournment is in
their opinion necessary in the interests of justice.
(2) In the event of any difference of opinion between the Commis-
sioners the opinion,of the majority shall prevail.
120 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) ACT, J915,
6. (1) The judgment of Commissioners appointed under the Acfc
Powers of Commissioners. s}ia11 be final and conclusive and such Commis-
sioners may pass upon any person convicted by
them any sentence authorised by law for the punishment of the offence of
which such person is convicted and no order of confirmation shall be
necessary in the case of any sentenced passed by them.
(2) If in any trial under this Act it is proved that the accused person has
committed any offence whether referred to in section 3 or in any order
under that section or not, the Commissioners may convict such accused
person of such oftence and pass any sentence authorised by law for the
punishment thereof.
7. The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, so far as
Application of Criminal fche^ *™ inconsistent with the special procedure
Procedure Code subject to prescribed by or under this A.ct, shall no t apply
modifications to proceedings to the proceedings of Commissioners appointed
under this Act, under this Act, but save as otherwise provided, x
that Code shall apply to such proceedings and the Commissioners shall
have all the powersjconferred by the Code on a Court of Session exercising
original jurisdiction.
8. (I) Notwithstanding the provision! of the Code of Criminal Proce*
Exclusion of interference of dure, 1898, or of any other law for the time j
other criminal courts. being in force, or of anything having the force
of law by whatsoever authority made or done, there shall be no appeal
from any order or sentence of Commissioners appointed under this Act,
and no Court shall have authority to revise any auch order or sentence,
or to transfer any case from such Commissioners, or to make aay order
under section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, or have any
jurisdiction of any kind in respBct of any proceedings under this Act.
(2) Nothing in sub-section (I) shall be deemed to affect the power of
the Grovernor-General in Council or the Local Goverment to make orders
under section 401 or 402 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, in
respect of persons sentenced by Commissioners under this Act.
9. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Evidence Acb,
1872, where the statement of any person has
been recorded by a magistrate, such statement
may be admitted in evidence in any trial before Commissioners appointed
under this Act if such person is dead or cannot be found or is incapable
of giving evidence, and the Commissioners are of opinion that such death,
disappearance or incapacity has been caused in the interest of the accused.
Rule-making powers of 10- The Local Government may, by notifica-
Local Government. tion in the local official Gazette, make rules
providing for —
(i) the times and places at which Commissioners appointed under this
Act may sit ;
(ii) The procedure of such Commissioners including the appointment
and powers of their President, and the procedure to be adopted in fche event
of any Commissioner being prevented from attending throughout the trial
of any accused person ;
LAW RELATING TO PRESS AND
SEDITION,
Revised pages* to be substituted for pages
121 to 129.
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) ACT, 1915. 121
(Hi) the manner in which prosecutions before such Commissioners
shall be conducted, and the appointment and powers of persons con-
ducting such prosecution ;
(iv) the execution of sentences psssed by such Commissioners ;
(v) the temporary custody or release on bail of persons Deferred to
or included in any order made under sub-section (1) of section 3, and for
the transmission of records to the Commissioners ; and
(vi) any matter which appears to the Local Government to be
necessary for carrying into effect the provisions of the Act relating or
ancillary to trials before Commissioners.
11. No order under this Act shall be called in question in any court
~ -j and no suit, prosecution or other legal proceed-
ings shall lie against any person for anything
which is in good faith done or intended to be clone under this Act
Statement of Objects and Reasons.
The existence of a state of war in which His Majesty's Govern-
ment is engaged has, as in England, demonstrated the necessity of arm-
ing the executive with certain special temporary emergency powers
requisite to secure the public safety and the defence of British India.
Further since the commencement of the war there have been
outbreaks of lawlessness in certain areas, the prompt punishment of
which is essential in the interests of the public security.
The present Bill confers powers on the Governor-General in Coun-
cil to make rules to meet the first object in view while in those areas
to which the special provisions may be extended, it provides for the
creation of special tribunals for the more speedy trial of certain classes
of offences which may be made over to them.
The Act will be only in force during the continuance of the present
war and for a period of six mouths thereafter.
*These pages have been reprinted in consequence of the (Consolidation) Rules, as
amended by subsequent notifications.
AN ORDINANCE To EXTEND THE POWERS CONFERRED BY THE DEFENCE OF
122 INDIA (CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT) ACT, 1915, No. Ill of 1915.
Published with Notification, dated, the 10th November, 1915.
1. (1) This Ordinance may be called the Def ence
Short title and extent. Qf In(Ua Ordinance, 1915.
(2) It extends to the whole of British India, including British Bal-
uchistan the Sonthal Parganas and the district of Angul.
2. Section 2 of the Defence of India (Criminal Law Amendment)
Extension of powers con- Act, 1915, shall be construed as if after clause
tained in section 2 of Act (1)* of sub-section (I), the following clauses
IV of 1915. were inserted, namely : —
44 (w) to require that there shall be placed, at the disposal of the
Governor-General in Council, the whole or any part of the output of
any factory, workshop, mine or other industrial concern for the
manufacture, preparation or extraction of any article or thing which,
in his opinion, can be utilised in the prosecution of the present war ;
(n) to take possession of, and use for the purpose of the Governor
General in Council, any such factory, workshop, mine or industrial
concern or any appurtenances or plant thereof ;
(o) to require any work in any such factory, workshop, mine or
industrial concern to be done in accordance with the directions of the
Governor General ;
(p) to regulate or restrict the carrying out of work in any such
factory, workshop, mine or industrial concern, or to remove the plant
therefrom with the object of increasing the output of any other such
factory,. workshop, mine or industrial concern ;
(q) to provide for any other action which may be necessary to
regulate the possession, or to facilitate the collection, manufacture,
preparation or extraction of any article or thing, which can, in the
opinion of the Governor General in Council, be utilised in the prosecu-
tion of the present war,, and,
(r) to regulate the sailings of British steamers from any port L
•itish India, and to reserve, for the use of the Governor General i]
in
British India, and to reserve, for the use of tiie u-overuor uenerai in
Council, all or any accommodation of whatever kind for the carriage
of persons, animals or goods on any such steamers."
The 9t/i December
No. 86. — In pursuance of section 2 of the Defence of India (Criminal
Law Amendment) Act, 1915 (TV of 1915), read with the Defence of
India Ordinance, 1915 (III of 1915) the Governor General in Council is
pleased to make the following rules :—
• 1. These rules may be called the Defence
of India (Consolidation) Rules, 1915.
L * Page 118.
DEFENCE OF I.NDIA (CONSOLIDATION) RULES. 123
Definitions ^' *n tnese rules unless there is anything
repugnant in the subject or context: —
(i) " The Act " means the Defence of India (Criminal Law
Amendment) Act, 1915.
(ii) " Competent Military authority " means the Commander-in-
chief in India, the General Officer Commanding an Army,
a Division, a Divisional Area, a Brigade, or any British
Commissioned Officer in independent command of a corps
or detachment of His Majesty's Forces.
(Hi) " Defended harbour " means any area declared by a notification
in this behalf of the Governor General in Council in the
Gazette of India to be a defended harbour for the purpose
of these rules.
3. Where, in the opinion of the Local Government, there are
Powers to deal with suspects reasonable grounds for believing that any
person has acted, is acting, or is about to act
in a manner prejudicial to the public safety, or the defence of British
India, the Local Government may, by order in writing, direct that
such person —
(a) shall not enter, reside or remain in any area specified in the
order ;
(b) shall reside or remain in any area in British India so
specified ;
(c) shall conduct himself in such manner or abstain from such
acts or take such order with any property in his possession
or under his control as may be specified in such order :
Provided that a Local Government shall not make an order
under clause (b) of this rule specifying an area outside the
Province without the previous sanction of the Governor
General in Council.
4. An order made under rule 3 shall be served on the person in
Service of orders under respect of whom it is made in the manner
provided in the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1898, for service of a summons, and upon such service such person,
shall be deemed to have had due notice thereof.
5. Whoever being a person in respect of whom an order has been
Penalty for breach of made under rule 3 knowingly disobeys any
direction in such order shall be punishable
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend
to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.
6. (1) Every person in respect of whom an order has been made
Power of photographing, under rule 3 shall, if so directed by any officer
etc persons against whom authorised in this behalf by general or special
been'rnaTe order of the Local Government:^
(a) permit himself to be photographed ;
(b) allow his finger impressions to be taken ;
(c) furnish such officer with specimens of his handwriting and
signature ;
(d) attend at such times and places as such officer may direct
for all or any of the foregoing purposes.
124 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CONSOLIDATION) RULES.
(2) If any person fails to comply with, or attempts to evade, any
direction given in accordance with the provisions of this rule,
he shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to six months or with fine which may extend
to Rs. 1,000, or with both.
7. The power to issue search-warrants conferred by section 98
Powers of search of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, shall
be deemed to- include a power to issue
warrants authorising the search of any place in Which any Magistrate,
mentioned in that section, has reason to believe that an
offence under the foregoing rules or any offence prejudicial
to the public safety or the defence of British India has
been, is being, or is about to be committed, and the seizure of anything
found therein or therean which the officer executing the warrant has
reason to believe is being used or intended to be used for any such
purpose as aforesaid, and the provisions of the said Code so far as they
can be made applicable shall apply to searches made under the autho-
rity of any warrant issued under this rule and to the disposal of any
property seized in any such search.
8. (1) In any area in which the Governor General in Council may,
Power to take possession foy notification in the Gazette of India,
of land, etc. declare that the provisions of this rule shall be
in force, it shall be lawful for the competent military authority and
any person duly authorised by him by order in writing where, for
the purpose of securing the public safety or the defence of British
India, it is necessary so to do : —
(a) to take possession of any land and to construct military
works, including roads, thereon, and to remove any trees,
hedges, and defences therefrom ;
(b) to take possession of any buildings or other property,
whether moveable or irnmoveable, including works from
the supply of gas, electricity, or water, and of any sources
of water-supply ;
(c) to take such steps as may be necessary for placing any
buildings or structures in a state of defence ;,
(d) to cause any buildings or structures to be destroyed or any
property of any kind to be moved from one place to
another, or to be destroyed ; and
(e) to do any other act involving interference with private
rights of property which is necessary for the purpose
aforesaid,
(2) The Chief Presidency Magistrate in a Presidency-town and
the District Magistrate elsewheie may, on the application of any
person who has suffered loss by the exercise of the power
conferred by sub-»ule (1), award to such person such compensation
as he thinks reasonable, and such award shall be final.
9. The competent military authority and any person authorised
EigUof access toUnd, etc.
perty whatsoever, and may also by order provide for the temporary
suspension of rights of way.over such land, buildings or other property.
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CONSOLIDATION) J'DLKS. 125
10. The competent military authority may, by order if he considers it
r>OWer to ^ose roads necessary so to do for the purposes of any military
operation or work of defence or other defended
military work, or of any work for which it is deemed necessary for the
purposes of the Act to afford military protection, close or divert any
road or pathway over or adjoining the land on which such work
is situate for so long as the order remains in force ;
Provided that, where any such road or path way is so closed or
diverted, the competent military authority shall —
(1) give notice in writing to the public or local authority (if
any) in whose charge such road or pathway is ;
(2) publish notice thereof in such manner as he may consider
best adapted for informing the public, and, where any
road or pathway is stopped up by means of any physical
obstruction, cause lights sufficient for the warning of
passengers to be set up every night whilst the road or
pathway is so stopped up ; and
(3) restore any such road or pathway to its original use and
condition as soon as the military necessities of the case
permit this to be done.
11. Where a competent military authority so orders, all persons
Power to require informa- residing or owning or occupying land, houses,
tion as to goods, etc. or other premises in such area as may be
specified in the order, or such of those persons as may be so specified,
shall, within such time as may be so specified, furnish a list of all
goods, animals, and othe' commodities of any nature o description so spe-
cified,' which may be in their custody or- under their control within the
specified area, on the rate on which the order is issued, stating their
nature and quantity, and the place in which th^y are severally
situated, and giving any other details that may reasonably be required.
If any person attempts to evade this rule by destroying, removing,
transferring or secreting any goods, animals o> commodities to which
an order issued unde< this rule relates, he shall be deemed to have
contravened these rules.
11 A * (1) Where, in the opinion of the Governor General in
Power to require that the Gouncil,any machine* y,tools or ofher plant forthe
*?•' time being in any f . >ry, workshop or industrial
f concern can be utilised 'in the manufacture of
should be placed at the munitions oi war, the Governor General in
disposal of the Governor Councilor any officer of Government authorised
General in Council. by him in this behalf, may, by order in writing,
require the occupier or other person in charge ofsuchfaetory,woikshopor
industrial concern to place at the disp sal of the Governor General in
Council, at such time and place as may be specified in the order, the
whole or any part which may be specified in the order, of such
machinery, tools or other plant, and the G vernor General in Council
may dispose of and use such machinery, tools or plant in suc-h manner
as he may consider necessary of expedient.
(2) Where, in accordance with an order made in exercise of the
powers conferred by sub-rule (1), machinery, tools or other plant
have been placed at the disposal of the Governor Gene' al in Council, the
* Added by Commerce and Industry Department Notification, No. 1106 (Factories)
dated the 23rd December 1915.
126 DKFKXCU OF INDIA (CONSOLIDATION) RULES.
Governor General in Council shall pay to the owner of such machinery,
tools or other plant such compensation for any loss immediately
attributable to such order, and for any services rendered or expen-
diture incurred in complying therewith as in default of agreement may
be decided to be just and reasonable, having regard to the circumstances
of the case, by the arbitration of an engineer having knowledge of
machinery to be nominated in this behalf by the G vern<-r Gene-al
in Council, and such decision shall be final.
(3) If the occupier or other person in charge of any factory, work-
shop or industrial concern disobeys or neglects to comply with anv o»der
made in the exercise of tin* power confer ed by sub-rule (1;, such
occupier <r other person shall be deemed to have contravened these
rules, and the authority making the order may forthwith take pos-
session of the machinery, tools or other plant specified in the order and
may dispose of and use the same in such manner as he may consider
necessary or expedient.
12. The Local Government or any authority not below the rank
of a District Magistrate or Commissioner of
Power to prohibit or limit police empowered by the Local Government
Sic places e'c gS' in this behalf, or a competent military authority
may, by order in writing, prohibit or limit, in
such way as it thinks fit, access to any building or place in the
possession or under the control of Government or of any local authority,
or to any building or place in the occupation, whether permanent or
otherwise, of His Majesty's naval or military forces <w of any police
force or to any public place in the vicinity of any such building or
place,
12A* (1) Any officer of Government authorised in this behalf by a
Power to arrest and detain general or special order of the local Govern-
pcrson suspected of acting nient may arrest without warrant any person
with intent to assist the a<railist whom a reasonable suspicion exists that
Si&Sute The Tbiic lie has acted> is actine or is about to act with
safety or the defend of intent to assist the King's enemies in a manner
British India. prejudicial to the public safety or the de
fence of British India.
(2) Any officer exercising the power conferred by this rule may
use any and every means necessary to enforce the same.
(3) Any officer making an arrest under this rule shall forthwith
report the fact to the local Government and pending receipt of the
orders of the local Government may by order in writing commit any
person so arrested to such custody as the local Government may by
general or special order specify in this behalf.
Provided that no person shall be detained in custody for a period
exceeding fifteen days without the order of the local Government.
Provider} further that no person shall be detained in custody under
this rule for a period beyond a month.
13. (1) In any area in which the Governor General in Council may,
Navigation in territorial by notification in the Gazette of India, declare
waters and rivers and that the provisions of this rule shall be in force,
channels connected there- the competent military authority or any other
with. authority empowered in this behalf by the
* Added by Home Department Notification, (Political), No. 5020 dated the 17th
December 1915.
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CONSOLIDATION) RULES. 127
Local Government, may make regulations as to the navigation
and mooring of vessels in the territorial waters adjacent to British
India and in rivers or channels connected therewith, and may by
such regulations probibit any vessel or class of vessels from entering
any such waters, rivers or channels which such authority may consider
it necessary to keep clear of vessels or of vessels of that class in the
interests of the public safety or the defence of British India.
(2) If any person disobeys or neglects to observe any regulation
made in the exercise of the power conferred by sub-rule '(I), he shall
be deemed to have contravened these rules.
14. (i) Every vessel in the territorial waters adjacent to British
Vessels to observe re- I11(^a or i11 aily river or channel connected there-
giilations and other orders. with shaii comply with any regulations made
under rule 13, and shall obey any orders given by
way of signal or otherwise by any naval, military or other ollicer engaged
in the defence of the coast or by any person authorised by such officer
in this behalf.
(2) If any vessel fails to comply with any sirh regulations or orders,
any such officer or person may use any and every means necessary to
compel compliance.
(3) If any vessel fails to comply with any such regulations or to obey
any such orders, the master or other person in command or in charge
of the vessels shall be deemed to have contravened these rules.
15. (1) In any area in which the Governor General in Council may,
andseTzur? S6arCh' arreSt by notincation in tlle Gazette of India, declare
that the provisions of this rule shall be in force,
any naval, military or other officer engaged in the defence of the coast,
or any person authorised in this behalf by such officer, may,—
(a) stop and search any vessel found within the territorial waters
adjacent to British India or in rivers or channels connect-
ed therewith ;
(b) search any place which he has reason to believe has been, is
or is about to be used for any purpose prejudicial to the
public safety or the defence of British India ;
(c) seize anything which he has reason to believe being used or
is intended to be used for any purpose prejudicial to the
public safety or the defence of British India, and
(d) arrest any person whom he has reason to believe has acted,
is acting, or is about to act in a manner prejudicial to the
public safety or the defence of British India.
(2) Any officer or person exercising the powers conferred by this
rule may use any and every means necessary to enforce the same.
(3) Any officer or person" making an arrest or seizure under this
rule shall forthwith report the fact to the Local Government, and,
pending the receipt of the orders of the Local Government, may detain
in custody any person arrested or thing seized :
Provided that no person shall be detained in custody for a period
exceeding fifteen days without the order of the Local Government :
Provided further that no person shall be detained in custody
under this rule for a period exceeding one month.
128 DEFENCE OF INDIA (CONSOLIDATION) RULES
(4) All articles seized under tins rule shall be disposed of in such
manner as tiie Local Government may direct.
16. (I) The Governor General in Council or any officer of
Power to control sailing Government authorised by him in this behalf
of certain steamers and to may, by order in writing, require the master or
take up accommodation other person in command or charge of any
British steamer to comply with all or any of
the following directions: —
(«) to alter in any way specified in such order the date fixed for
the sailing of t>ucn bbc«.uuui-, and to sail on such altered
date ;
(b) to place at the disposal of the Governor General in Council
the whole, or any part which may be specified in the
order, of the accommodation available on such steamer,
and to employ the same for the carriage of such persons,
animals or things as may be specified in the order ; and
(c) to undertake or permit to be undertaken such structural
additions or alterations on board such steamer as may
be necessarj7 to fit the same for the safe carriage of any
persons, animals or things in respect of whom or of which
order* has been made under clause (b).
(2) Where any order has been made in exercise of the powers
conferred by sub-rule (1) in respect of any steamer, the Governor
General in Council shall pay to the owner of such steamer such com-
pensation for any loss immediately attributable to such order and for
any services rendered or expenditure incurred in complying therewith,
as in default of agreement may be decided to be just and reasonable
having regard to the circumstances of the case, by the arbitration of
a person having knowledge of shipping affairs to be nominated in this
behalf by the Governor General in Council, and such decision shall
be final.
(3) If the master or other person in command or charge of any
steamer disobeys or neglects to observe any directions given in the
exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1), such master or
other person shall be deemed to have contravened these rules.
17. (1) Any person entering into or departing from British India,
Prevention of conveyance on being required to do so by any officer
of letters, etc., out of or into appointed by the Local Government in this
British India. behalf, shall make a declaration as to whether
or not he is carrying or conveying letters or other written messages
intended to be transmitted by post or otherwise delivered, and, if so
required, shall produce to the officer any such letters or messages ;
and such officer may search any such person and any baggage with a
view to ascertaining whether such person, or the person to wlK-m the
baggage belongs, is carrying or conveying any such letters or mes-
sages.
(2) The officer may examine any letters or other messages so
produced to him or found on such search, and, unless satisfied that
they ape of an innocent nature, shall transmit them to such
authority as the Local Government may, by general or special order,
direct, and such authority may dispose as it thinks fit of such letters
or messages.
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CONSOLIDATION) RULES 128 (a)
Obstruction to, or dis-
obedience of, authority act- , 18. No person shall —
iug under these rules.
(a) voluntarily obstruct, or offer any resistance to, or impede,
or otherwise interfere with, or
(b) withhold any information in his possession which he is
required to furnish under the provisions of any of these
rules from, or
(c) wilfully give false or misleading information to, or
(d) fail or neglect to comply with any order issued by,
any authority or any officer or other person who is carrying out the
orders of such authority or who is otherwise acting in accordance
with his duty under any of the provisions of these rules.
19. (1) No person shall, without the permission of the compe-
Prohibition of photo- tent military authority, make any photograph,
graphing of naval and sketch, plan, model, or other representation
military works. of any naval or military work, or of any dock
or harbour work in or in connection with a defended harbour, or
with intent to assist the enemy, of any other place or thing, and if
any person without lawful authority or excuse has in his possession
any representation of any such work of such a nature as is calculat-
ed to be useful to the enemy he shall be deemed to have con-
travened these rules.
(2) For the purpose of this rule, the expression ' harbour work '
includes lights, buoys, beacons, marks and other things for the pur-
pose of facilitating navigation in or into a harbour.
20. (1) No person shall, without lawful authority, transmit,
Prohibition of non-postal Otherwise than through the post, or con-
communications with enemy, vey to or from British India, or receive or
or have in his possession for such transniittal
or conveyance any letter or written message from or originating
with, or to or intended for —
(ft) any person, or body of persons, of whatever nationality, re-
sident or carrying on business in any country for the time being at war
with His Majesty, or acting on behalf or in the interests of any
person or body of persons so resident or carrying on business*; or
(b) any person or body of persons whose Sovereign or State is at
war with His Majesty, and who resides or carries on business in
British India :
Provided that a person shall not be deemed to be guilty of a
contravention of this rule if he proves that he did not know, and had
no reason to suspect, that the letter or message in question was such
a letter or message as aforesaid.
(2) This rule is in addition to, and not in derogation of, any pro-
visions contained in the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 (VI of 1898), and
shall not prejudice any right to take proceedings under that Act in
respect of any transaction which is an offence under that Act.
21. No person shall send from British India, .whether by post or
Prohibition of transmis- otherwise, any document containing any mat-
sion of messages in secret ter written in any medium which in riot visible
writing. unless subjected to heat or other treatment.
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CONSOLIDATION) RULES
22. No person shall voluntarily impede, hamper, or obstruct the
Obstruction of training, training of His Majesty's naval or military
forces, or of the Imperial Service Troops.
23. No person shall dissuade or attempt to dissuade any person
Disuasion from enlistment. Jj?™ entering the military or police service of
His Majesty :
Provided that nothing in this rule shall apply to advi< e true
in substance and given in good faith for the benefit of the individual
to whom it is given.
24. No person shall induce or attempt to induce any person in the
Tampering with Govern- service of His Majesty to disregard or fail in his
ment servants. duty as such servant.
25. (1) Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by signs,
Publication or circulation or bJ visible representations or otherwise pub-
<rf statements or reports, lishes or circulates any statement, rumour or
report —
(a) which is false and which he has no reasonable ground to believe
to be true, with intent to cause or which is likely to cause fear or alarm
to the public or to any section of the public; or
(b) with intent to jeopardise or which is likely to jeopardise the
success of His Majesty's forces by land or sea or the success of the forces
of any Power in alliance with His Majesty; or
(c) with intent to prejudice or which is likely to prejudice HisMajeg-
ty's relations with foreign Powers ; or
(d) with intent to promote or which is likely to promote feelings of
enmity and hatred between different classes of His Majesty's subjects,
shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine, or if it is
proved that he did so with intent to assist the King's enemies, with
death, transportation for life or imprisonment for a term which may
extend to ten years.
(2) No Court shall take cognizance of any offence against this rule
save upon complaint made by order of, or under authority from, the
Governor General in Council, the Local Government or some officer em-
powered by the Governor General in Council in this behalf
26. (1) Whoever is found trespassing on any railway, or loitering
on, under or near any tunnel, bridge, viaduct
Trespassing on Qr culvert in circumstances which afford reason
to believe that he is so trespassing or loitering
with a view to committing an offence, shall be punishable with
imprisonment for a term which "may extend to seven years, or with
fine, or with both.
(2) The expression " offence " for the purposes of this rule
means anything punishable under any law for the time being in force
with imprisonment fora term of six months or upwards, whether
with or without fine.
27. (1) Every authority who makes an order in pursuance of
Publication of notice of these rules shall, subject to the provisions of
orders under the rules, rule 4, publish notice of the order in such
manner as he may consider best adapted for informing persons affec-
ted by the order.
DEFENCE OF INDIA (CONSOLIDATION) RULES 128(c)
(2) Whoever, without lawful authority, defaces or otherwise
tampers with any notice posted up in pursuance of these rules shall be
punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six
months, or with fine, or with both.
28. Any person who attempts to commit, or abets or attempts to
abet the commission of any act prohibited by or
punishable under these rules shall be deemed
to have acted in contavention of these rules in like manner as if he had
himself committed the act.
29. Whoever contravenes any of these rules shall, where no ex-
press provision is made herein for the punish-
nof oT K pTvwTor0" P«>nt <* such contravention be punishable with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to
three years, or with fine, or with both.
30. Save as otherwise provided in rule 25 (2), no Court shall take
Cognizance ofcontraven- cognizance of any offence punishable under
tions of the rules. these rules unless the Local Government, a
Chief Presidency Magistrate, a District Magistrate or competent
military authority not being below the rank of a Lieutenant-Colonel h -s,
by order in writing, consented to the initiation of the proceedings.
31. The General Clauses Act, 1897 (X of 1897), shall apply for the
Interpretation of the rules. Purpose of the interpretation of these rules in
like manner as it applies for the purpose of the
interpretation of an Act of the Governor General in Council.
32. The rules published with the following notifications of the
Rescission of former rules Government of India are hereby rescinded,
and savings. namely :-
In the Home Department— No. 1196, dated 2nd April, 1915 ;
No. 1881, dated 18th June, 1915 ; No. 2374, dated 30th July, 1915.
In the Army Department, Judicial— No. 693, dated 23rd July 1915
No. 1104, dated 5th November, 1915; No. 1139, dated 12th November, 1915
No. 1170, dated 19th November, 1915 :
Provided that the rescission of any such rule shall not—
(a) affect the previous operation of any rule so rescinded or
anything duly done or suffered thereunder, or
(b) affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired,
accrued orincurred under any rule so rescinded, or
(c) affect any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in
respect of any offence committed against any rule so rescinded, or
affect any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any
such right, privilege, obligation or liability, penalty forfeiture or
punishment as aforesaid ; and any such investigation, legal proceeding
or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, ami any such
penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if such rule had
not been rescinded.
Provided further, that any sanction, permission or direction given,
or order, requirement or appointment made, authority issued or other
action taken under any rule so rescinded shall be deemed to have
been given, made, issued or ta.ken under the corresponding provision
of these rules.
128<. RCLES UNDER THE DEFENCE OF IXDIA ACT.
HOME DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION No. 1095, BATED
THE 22ND MARCH, 1915.
In exercise of the power conferred by section 1 . sub-section (3), of
the Defence of India (Criminal Law Amendment.) Act of 1915, the
Governor-General in Coune.il is pleased to direct that sections 3 to 11
of the said Act shall come into force with effect from the date of
ihN notification in the districts of the Punjab specified in the
schedule annexed hereto.
SCHEDULE.
( Lahore District.
I Amritsar District.
Lahore Division . <{ Gurdasptir District.
I Sialkot District.
I Gujranwalla District.
( Kangra District.
| Hoshiarpur District.
Jullundur Division . . .- -j Ludhiana District.
I Jullundur District.
I Ferozepore District.
( Multan District.
Jhan District.
Multan Division .
Dera Ghazi Khan District.
I Muzaft'argarh District.
The 23rd April 1915.
Home Department Notification No. 1379.— In exercise of the
power ••< mf<*red by section 1, sub-section (3), of the Defence of India
(Criminal Law Amendment) Act of 1915 (IV of 1915), the Governor-
General in Council is pleased to direct that sections 3 to 1 1 of the
said Act shall come into force, with effect from the date of this
notification in the districts of the Presidency of Bengal specified in
the schedule annexed hereto :
SCHEDULE.
( Midnapore District.
Burd wan Division ... ... { Howrah „
(. Hooghly „
Presidency Division ......
{Dacca District.
Faridpnr „
Mymensmg
Backerganj „
( Rajs ha hi District.
Diimjpur
Rajshahi Division ... ... j Rangpur „
')' Jalpaiguri „
^ Pubna
RULES UNO KB, THE DEFENCE OF INDIA ACT.
[ Tippera District.
Chittagong Division ... < Noakhali „
I Ghittagong „
1280)
JUDICIAL.
HOME DEPARTMENT, DATED 24TH DECEMBER 1915.
No. 1310. — The Governor General in Council is pleased to declare
that the provisions of rules 13 and 15 of the Defence of India (Con-
solidation) Rules, 1915, shall be in force in the areas specified in the
schedule annexed hereto-
PRESIDENCY OR
PROVINCK.
Bombay
.Madras
Behar and Orissa
Bengal
Burma
SCHEDULE.
CIVIL DISTRICT.
j Karachi (Sind). Hyderabad (Sind). Ahmedabad.
Broach. Sur a t. Thana. Bombay City.
I Kolaba. Ratnagiri. North Kanara.
( South Kanara. Malabar. Tinnevelly. Ramnad.
; Tanjore. South Arcot. Chinglepur. Nellore.
Guntur. Kistna. Godaveri. Vizagapatam.
Ganjam.
Puri. Outtack. Balasore.
( Midnapore. 24-Parganas. Howraii. HoogliU.
Khulna. Backergunge. Faridpur. Dacca.
( Tippera. Noakhali. Chittagong.
j Akyab. Kyaukpyu. Sandoway. Basse in,
Myaungmya. Pyapon. Hanthawaddy. Pegu.
( Thaton. Amherst. Tavotory, Mergui.
Andamans and Nicobars The whole.
Aden
j The whole of the territory under the jurisdie-
\ tion of the Resident.
DEFENCE OF INDIA RULES, 1915. 129
HOME DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION No. 1789, DATED THE IOTH JUNE, 1915.
In exercise of the power conferred by section 1, sub-section (3), of the
Defence of India (Criminal Law Amendment) Act of 1915 (IV of 1915),
the Q-overnor-General in Council is pleased to'direct that sections 3 to 11
of the said Act shall come into force, with effect from the date of this
notification in the Nadia district of the Presidency of Bengal.
FOREIGN AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION No. 1047-1. B,, DATED
THE STH JUNE, 1915.
In exercise of the powers conferred by section 2 of the Defence of India
(Criminal Law Amendment) Act, 1915 (IV of 1915), as applied to Berar,
the Governor-General in Council is pleased to direct that the rules
issued under the notification of the Government of India in the Home
Department No 1 1 96-Political, dated the 2nd April 1915, shall apply to
Berar, subject to the following modifications, namely : —
(1) All references in the said rules to the Local Government shall
be read as referring to the Chief Commsssioner of the Central
Provinces, and
(2) All references to British India shall be read as including Berar.
FOREIGN DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION No. 1811-1, B., DATED THE 17TH
AUGUST, 1915.
In exercise of the powers conferred by section 2 of the Defence of India
(Criminal Law Amendment) Act, 1915 (IV of 1915) as applied to Berar,
the Governor-General in Couucil is pleased to direct that the following
further amendments shall be made in the Defence of India Rules
1915, as applied to Berar by the notification of the Government of India
in the Foreign and Political Department No. 1047-1. B., dated the 8th
June, 1915, namely : —
1. After rule 3 the following shall be inserted, namely :—
3-A. An order made under rule 3 shall be served on the person in
Service of orders under respect of whom it is made in the manner pro-
rule 3. vided in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
for service of a summons, and upon such service such person shall be
deemed to have1 had due notice thereof.
2. After rule 4 the following rule shall be inserted, namely : —
4. A. (I) Every person in respect of whom an order has been made
Tower of photographing, under rule 3, shall, if so directed by any officer
etc., person against whom authorised in this behalf by general or special
orders under rule 3 have order of the local Government,—
been made. '
(a) permit himself to be photographed ;
(b) allow his finger impressions to be taken ;
(c) furnish such officer with specimens of his handwriting and
signature ;
(d) attend at such times and such places as such officer may direct
for or all any of the foregoing purposes.
130 DEFENCE OF INDIA RULES, 1915; (PUNJAB).
(2) If any person fails to comply with or attempts to evade any direc-
tion given in accordance with the provisions of this rule he shall be
punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to six months or with fine which may extend to Rs. 1,000, or with
both,
The Government of the Punjab, Notification No. 560 the 7th April 1915.
In supersession of the rules published with Punjab Government
Notification No. 523, dated 31st March 1915, and in exercise of the
powers conferred by section 10 of the Defence of India Act, 1915, the
Lieutenant-Governor is pleased hereby to make the following rules :—
RULES.
1. Commissioners may sit for the trial of any offence cognizable by
Time and place of sitting. Jheif ..at. aUV, **m? aPd .a* ™? PlaCG wlfchin the
local limits of their jurisdiction.
President.
2. (a) The senior member of the Commission, or in case of doubt such
Appointment and powers members as^the Local Government may nominate
of President, in this behalf, shall be the President of the Com-
mission.
(6) The President shall determine the times of sitting, shall pronounce
the orders and judgment of the Commission, and shall have power to
regulate all matters incidental to any trial before the Commission.
(c) All warrants of execution and all other processes may be signed
by the President for and on behalf of the Commission.
Absence of member.
3. In the absence of any member of the Commission the trial shall be
Absence of member. adjourned for such time as the remaining
members shall consider reasonable.
In the event of the likelihood of the prolonged absence of any member
of the Commission, the local Government may appoint another Commis-
sioner in his stead, and when the Commissioner so appointed takes his
seat, the trial shall be resumed from the point at which it was interrupted.
Provided that upon such resumption the accused may demand that the
witnesses or any of them shall be resummoned and reheard.
Procedure.
4. When any person or persons are accused of more offences than one
Joinder of ctar es anc* ^e Commissioners are of opinion that the
offences are such that they should be tried
together, then the said person or persons may be charged with and tried
at one trial for every such offence.
5. When any person is convicted at one trial of two or more offences, the
of proviso (a), aggregate of the terms of imprisonment to which
35 (i), Criminal he may be sentenced shall not be subject to the
Procedure Code. limit of 14 years specified in proviso (a) to
section 35 (I) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
DEFENCE OF INDIA RULES, 1915; ((PUNJAB). 131
6. When the accused appears or is brought before the Commissioners,
Cross-examination of wit- the prosecutor shall state briefly the particulars
ness, of the offence with which the accused is charged
and the evidence by which he expects to prove the guilt of the accused.
As the evidence of each witness for the prosecution is concluded, the
accused shall be given an opportunity of cross-examining him, and after
such cross-examination (if any) and re-examination (if any) the
Commissioners may discharge the witness, and the accused shall not recall
for further examination, or cross-examination without leave of the
Commissioners, any witness thus discharged.
7. As soon as the charge is framed, the accused shall be required
at once to give in, orally or in writing, a list of
Wrfnesses forth* defence. ^^ .f ^ ^ he ^^ to be
summoned to give evidence in his defence.
The attendance of any witness not named in the list shall not be
compelled on the application of the accused unless the Commissioners
consider that his attendance is necessary in the interests of justice,
8. If any accused person at any stage of the proceedings is prevented
Illness of accused. ^7 illness o* other sufficient cause from being
present, the Commissioners may proceed with the
trial in his absence, provided that a pleader is present on his behalf.
Prosecutors.
9. Any Public Prosecutor, any Police officer of or above the rank of
Prosecution of offences. Court Inspector and any person appointed in this
behalf by the Local Government may conduct
the prosecution of any case before the Commissioners.
Execution.
10. When a sentence of death is passed by the Commissioners, the
Sentence of death, Commissioners shall cause the sentence to be
carried into effect by issuing a warrant or taking
such other steps as may be necessary.
11. When any sentence other than a sentence of death is passed by the
Other sentences Commissioners, the Commissioners in causing the
sentence to be carried out shall observe the pro-
cedure prescribed for a Court in Chapter XXVIII of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1898.
12. For the purpose of section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
Successor in office to the 1898, the District Magistrate of the district in
Commissioners. which sentence was pronounced upon the accused
shall be deemed to be the successor in office of the Commissioners.
Detention in custody.
Detention 13> ^ The Commissioners may detain in
Kemand, ' custody any accused persons being tried before
them.
(V) The District Magistrate shall have power to remand to custody any
persons in respect of whom an order has been made under sub-sect'on (I)
of section 3 of the Act until such time as the Commissioners order that the
accused shall be brought before them for trial.
132 DEFENCE OF INBIA RULES> 1915 •
Forms.
14* The forms prescribed in the 5th schedule to the Code of Criminal
Use of forms. Procedure, 1898, may be used with such changes
as may be required in each case for the proceed-
ings of Commissioners.
GOVERNMENT OF BENGAL NOTIFICATION No. 1198 P. D., DATED
2ND JUNE 1915.
In exercise of the powers conferred by section 10 of the Defence
of India (Criminal Law Amendment) Act, 1915 (IV of 1915), the Gover-
nor in Council is pleased to make the following rules : —
RULES.
1. Commissioners may sit for the trial of any offence cognizable by
Time and place of sitting. fchern at Such times and Places as may be
convenient.
PRESIDENT.
2. (a) The President of the Commissioners shall be such one of the
Commissioners as the Local Government may
nominate in this behalf.
(b) The President shall determine the times of sitting, shall pronounce
the orders and judgment of the Commissioners and shall have power to
regulate all matters incidental to any trial before the Commissioners.
(c) All letters, requisitions, warrants, notices, and other processes
issued by the Commissioners shall be issued over the signature of
the President or failing him, over that of any one of the Commissioners.
The Commissioners shall be entitled to use either their own seal, or
the seal of the District Magistrate of the district in which the trial
takes place.
(d) All processes for attendance of witnesses or production of docu-
ments, papers, or things and requisitions for records shall issue in the
same way as if the trial were to take place before the Sessions Court of
the district.
Applications for processes and for requisitions before the commence-
ment of the trial shall be made to a Magistrate of the first class in the
district where the trial is to be held, and such Magistrate shall have
power to issue processes and requisitions which will be returnable before
the Commissioners.
The Commissioners shall have all the powers of a Criminal Court in
respect of calling for records and exhibits from other Courts.
ABSENCE OF COMMISSIONER.
3. In the absence of any Commissioner the trial shall be adjourned
for such time as tho remaining Commissioners
Absence of member, shftll consider reasonable.
DEFENCE OF INDIA RULES, 1915 J (BENGAL). 133
Tn the event of the likelihood of a prolonged absence of any Commis-
sioner the Local Government may appoint another Commissioner in his
stead) and when the Commissioner so appointed takes his seat, the trial
shall be resumed From the point at which it was interrupted :
Provided that upon such resumption the accused may demand that
the witnesses or any of them shall be resummoned and reheard. Any
witness whom the Commissioners recall may be examined at any stage
of the case,
PROCEDURE.
4. When any person or persons are accused of more offences than one
and the Commissioners are of opinion that the
offences are such that they should be tried
together, then the said person or persons may be charged with and tried
at one trial for every such offence.
5. When any person is convicted at one trial of two or more offences
Modification of proviso (a), the Aggregate of the terms of imprisonment
Section 35 (/), Criminal to which he may be sentenced shall not be
Procedure Code- subject to the limit of 14 years specified in
proviso (a) to section 35 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898.
6. When the accused appears or is brought before the Commissioners
the charge, if a charge has been already framed, shall be read out and
explained to the accused, and he shall be asked whether he is guilty of
the offence charged on claims to, be tried. If the accused pleads guilty
the plea shall be recorded and he may be convicted thereon. If the
accused refuses to, or does not plead or claims to be tried, and in cases
in which no charge has already been framed, the prosecutor shall state
briefly the particulars of the offence with which the accused is charged
and the evidence by which he expects to prove the guilt of the accused.
As the evidence of each witness for the prosecution is concluded, the
accused shall be given an opportunity of cross-examining him, and after
such cross-examination (if any) and re-examina-
Cross-exaniination of wit- tion (if any) the Commissioners may discharge
the witness, and the accused shall not recall for
further examination or cross-examination, without leave of the Commis-
sioners, any witness so discharged.
7. As soon as the charge is framed, or in cases in which a charge
has been framed before the commencement of the trial, at such stage as
the Commissioners may direct, the accused shall be required at once to
give, orally or in writing a list of the persons, if any, whom he wishes
Witnesses for Defence. to be summoned to give evidence, in his
defence.
If the Commissioners think that any witness is included in the
list for the purpose of vexation or delay or of defeating the ends of
justice, the Commissioners may require the accused to satisfy them that
there are reasonable grounds for believing that the evidence of such
witness is material, and if they are not so satisfied, may refuse to summon
the witness (recording their reasons for such refusal), or may before
summoning him require such sum to be deposited as they think necessary
to defray the expense of obtaining the attendance of the witness and
all other proper expenses,
134 DEFENCE OF INDIA RULES, 1915 ; (BENGAL).
If any inquiry preparatory to commitment has been held, the provi-
sions of section 288, Criminal Procedure Code, shall be applicable.
8. If any accused person at any stage of the proceedings is prevented
by illness or other sufficient cause from being present, the Commissioners
may direct that he be allowed to appear in
Court by a pleader, and the trial shall there-
upon proceed notwithstanding the absence of the said accused person.
PROSECOTORS.
9. Any Public Prosecutor, any Police Officer of or above the rank of
Court Inspector, and any person appointed in this behalf by the Local
Government or by the Superintendent and Re-
membrancer of Legal Aflaira may conduct the
prosecution of any case before the Commissioners.
EXECUTION.
10. When a sentence of death is passed by the Commissioners, the
Commissioners shall cause the sentenced to be carried into effect by
Sentence of death. be^eTsar?! **** ""*
11. When any sentence other than a sentence of death is passed by
the Commissioners, the Commissioners in causing the sentence to be
carried out shall observe the procedure pre-
scribed for a Court in Chapter XXVIII of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
12. For the purpose of section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1898, the District Magistrate, of the district in which sentence was
pronounced upon the accused shall be deemed
Successor in office to the to be the successor in office of the Commis-
Commissioners.
sioners.
DETENTION IN CUSTODY.
13. (a) The Commissioners may detain in custody any accused
persons being tried before them.
(b) The District Magistrate shall have power to remand to custody
any persons in respect of whom an order has been made under sub-sec-
tion (1) of section 3 of the Act, until such time
Detention remand. as the Commissioners order that the accused
shall be brought before them for trial.
FORMS.
14. The forms prescribed in the 5th schedule to the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1898, may be used with such changes as may be required in
each case for the proceedings of the Commissioners.
15. The records of cases tried by Commissioners shall be deposited in
the record-room of the District Magistrate of the district in which the
trial is held.
DEFENCE OF INDIA RULES, 1915. 135
HOME DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION No. 3208, DATED THE 22ND
SEPTEMBER 1915.
In exercise of the power conferred by section 1, sub-section (3) of the
Uetence ot India (Criminal Law Amendment) Act of 1915 (IV of 1915}
the Governor-General in Council is pleased to direct that sections 3 to 11
the said Act shall come into force with effect from the date of this
notification in the Balasore District of the Province of Bihar and Orissa
HOME DEPARTM ENT NOTIFICATION No. 3412, DATED THE 7th
OCTOBER 1915.
In exercise of the power conferred by section 1 sub-section (3) of the
Defence of India (Criminal Law Amendment; Act of 1915 (IV of 1915),
the Governor-General in Council is pleased to direct that sections 3 to 11
of the saidl Act shall come into force with effect from the date of this
notification in the Benares District of the Provinces of Agra and Oudh.
The Special Commission appointed under the Defence of India Act to try, what is known
as, the Lahore Conspiracy case delivered judgment on the 13th September 1915. Before
proceeding to give an account of how the conspiracy to overthrow the British Power in,
India was conceived, how it matured into waging war, how it was put into operation and
how it failed ; and before treating each accused's case individually, the Commissioner
found it necessary to clear the ground by first disposing of the following law points raised
by the Counsel in the case : —
1 — Proof of conspiracy and relevancy of evidence under Section 10, 2 — Charges, 3 —
Responsibility of accused for acts committed after their arrest. 4 — Liability of dacoits
under Section 396, I. P. C. 5— Statement to the police. 6 — Confessions to the Zaildar. 7 —
Testimony of accomplices, and quasi accomplices. 8 —Legality of pardon tendered to Umrao
Singh. 9— Spy's evidence. 10 — Relevancy of documents found in 1909 with Bhai
Parmanand and the Judgment of Magistrate in that case. 11— Objection to the admissi-
bility of Ichhra Singh's statement. 12. Retracted confessions, 13— Waging War
and abetment thereof. 14— Approver Statement.
The following is a summary of the findings of the Commission.
There were originally 63 accused, but two were discharged during the trial and judgment
was reserved regarding the remaining 61, Of the 61 persons the Commission sentenced
24 to death and 27 to transportation for life ( eleven witn a recommendation to mercy).
Six were sentenced to terms of imprisonment and four were acquitted,
In re King Emperor versus Anand Kishor and others
Charges under section 121, 123, 396, and others.
FOREIGN DEPARTMENT, NOTIFICATION DATED THE 22i^ JANUARY 1910.
The following papers are published for general information.
I.
Letters from His Excellency Lord Minto* to certain Ruling Chiefs and
the replies thereto received up to date.
1. Letter to His Highness the Nizain of Hyderabad, dated the 6th
Aug. 1909.
2. Reply of Hia Highness the Nizam of Hyderabad, dated the 15th
Oct. 1909.
3. Reply of His Highness the Maharao of Kota, dated the 28th Aug.
1909.
• 4. Reply of Her Highness the Begum of Bhopal, dated the 4th Sep.
1909.
5. Reply of His Highness the Maharao Raja of Bundi, dated the 6th
Sep. 1909,
6. Reply of His Highness the Maharaja of Orchha, dated the 23rd
Sep. 1909.
7. Reply of His Highness the Raja of Dewas, Senior Branch, dated the
28th Sep, 1909.
8. Reply of His Highness the Nawab of Tonk, dated the 29th Sep. 1909,
9. Reply of His Highness the Nawab of Jaora, dated the 30th Sep.
1909,
10. Reply of His Highness the Raja of Ratlam, dated the 6th Oct.1909,
11. Reply of His Highness the Maharaja of Kishangarh, dated the 17th
Oct. 1909.
12. Reply of His Highness the Maharana of Udaipur (Me war), dated
the 19th Oct, 1909,
13. Reply of His Highness the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, dated
the 28th Oct, 1909.
14. Reply of His Highness the Maharaj Rana of Dholpur, dated the
30th Oct. 1909.
15. Reply of His Highness the Maharaja of Rewah, dated the 2nd Nov-
1909.
16. Reply of His Highness the Maharaja of Jodhpur, dated the 3rd
Nov, 1909,
17. Reply of His Highneis the Maharaja of Mysore, dated the llth
Nov. 1909.
18. Reply of His Highness the Maharaja of Baroda, dated the 19th
Nov. 1909.
19. Reply of His Highness the Maharaja Scindia of Gwalior, dated
the 3rd Dec. 1909.
20. Reply of His Highness the Maharaja of Bikaner, dated the 29th
Dec. 1909.
21. Letter of His Highness the Nawab of Rampur, dated the 12th
Sept. 1909, to His Honour the Lieutenant-Go vernor of the
United Provinces of Agra and Oudh.
22. Letter of His Highness the Raja of Tehri, dated the 20th Sep.
1909, to His Honour the Lieutenant-Go vernor of the United
Provinces of Agra and Oudh.
• [Separate letters were addressed to each of the Ruling Chiefs. The letter to Hia
Highnesa the Nizam of Hyderabad will indicate sufficiently the purport of the letters.]
MINTO'S LETTER AND HIS dfGHNESS THE NlZAM's REPLY. 137
I, From— His Excellency the Viceroy and Governor-General of
India.
To — His Highness the Nizam of Hyderabad, dated the 6th;
August 1909.
After compliments. — Now that seditious people have endeavoured to
spread their nefarious doctrines in several of the Native States of India,
I feel that it is desirable to address Your Highness on the subject. As
those doctrines are subversive of internal peace and good government, the
matter is one in which the interests of the Government of India and of the
Killing Princes in- India are identical, and Your Highness will, 1 am
confident, agree with me that it is appropriate that we should exchange
opinions on the subject with a view to mutual co-operation against a
common danger. For although in Your Highness's dominions there is no
serious cause for anxiety at present — a result mainly due to the action of
Your Highness in dealing with seditious manifestations— I feel that the
time has come when we may advantageously concert measures and prepare
a policy to exclude effectually seditious agitation. It is very true that in
such a matter to be forewarned is to be forearmed.
I wish to assure Your Highness that I do not contemplate or counsel the
adoption of any general rules or general co irse of action. The circumstances
of different States vary so greatly, the treaty relations which unite them to
the Paramount Power are so diverse, that any general policy would
create endless difficulties, even were a general policy desirable, Your
Highness will probably agree with me that each State must work out its
own policy vvkh reference to local conditions. Should it be necessary to
combine in some matters such as in circulating information, and the
surveillance of individuals suspected of propagating sedition, I shall still be
firmly of opinion that each State should deal with its own problems.
But my advice in regard to the policy to be adopted is likely to be
sought and I should greatly value a full and frank expression of Your
Highness's opinion as to the measures which will be effectual in keeping
out of Native States the insidious evil of sedition, and the manner in wind*
I could assist towards this end, I feel confident that Your Highness, the
old and valued ally of the British Government, will gladly help me with
your wise and experienced advice.
(2) From His Highness the Nizam of Hyderabad, dated the 15th October
1909.
After Compliments.— -The Hon'ble Mr. M. F. O'Dwyer presented to me
personally on the 26-th August 1909 Your Excellency's esteemed Kharita
of the frth idem regarding the endeavours made by seditious people to
spread their nefarious doctrines in several of the Native States of India.
2. I quite agree with Your Excellency in thinking that these doctrines
are subversive of internal peace and good government, and that the matter
is one in which the interests of the Government of India and of the Indian
Princes are identical. I am deeply sensible of the kind consideration with
you have taken me into your confiUease aud asked me to exchange
138 HIS HIGHNESS THE NIX AM.
opinions with Your Excellency with a view to mutual co- operation against
a common danger. Once the forces of lawlessness and disorder are let loose
there is no knowing where they will stop. It is true that compared with
the enormous population of India the disaffected people are a very
insignificant minority, but given the time and opportunity there exists
the danger of this small minority spreading its tentacles all over the
country, and inoculating with its poisonous doctrines the classes and masses
hitherto untouched by this seditous movement.
3. I thank Your Excellency for telling me that in my dominions there"
is no serious cause for anxiety at present, and that the result is mainly
due to my action in dealing with seditious manifestations. I trust I may
not be considered an optimist in indulging in the hope that, under Godvs
blessing, there will probably be no cause for anxiety in the future also.
My people as a rule are contented, peaceful and law-abiding,, and I can
say, with pardonable pride, that they are bound to me by ties of affection
and loyalty. And as Your Excellency *has been pleased to address me
by inherited title as the old and valued ally of the British Government,
my people's loyalty to me means loyalty to the British Government also.
I need hardly say that it has always been my endeavour to uphold and
maintain the traditions of my house. From the very outset, my policy
has been to trust my people and to show them that I trust them. I have
abstained from causing them alarm by issuing manifestos warning them
against sedition. But at the same time I have not been unmindful
of the existing danger and a very strict watch has been kept over local
officials, more especially over those who are close to, and might be in
sympathy with neighbouring seditious places in British India. Orders
have been issued to the Police and District Magistrates not to allow any
meetings to be held in which there was any likelihood of inflammatory
speeches being made. Petty officials and other persons having a tendency
to sympathise with the movement have from time to time been warned,
and some of the former have been transferred, in order to break up any
attempt to form a clique or combination for undesirable purposes. The
head of the Education Department has been specially directed to exercise
strict supervision over teachers and students and to prevent their participa*
tion in any political demonstration whatever.
4. So far, any disaffected people coming from outside have not Been
able to gain a faoting in my dominions. Judicious but summary action
is taken under my orders in all such cases. Instances have occurred of
disaffected individuals from British India arriving here, bit t my Police
have ever kept a careful watch on them, and they have been promptly
but quietly sent away from my territory. In matters of this kind, so far
as my o\vu dominions are concerned, I implicitly believe in working quietly
but with promptitude and firmness. Believing as I do, in the policy of
deportation of undesirable individuals from my dominions, I need hardly
say that I am in full sympathy with the Regulation of 1818 which I
consider most efficacious in dealing with persons known to be given to
sedition.
5. I am at one with Your Excellency in believing that no general rules
or general course of action could be laid down as regards the Native States
of India. The circumstances of different States are so diversified thafc
One general policy for them all would not certainly be desirable. I
am also in thorough agreement with your views that each State should
SIS HIGHNESS THE NIZAM. 139
Work out its own policy with reference to local conditions. But it is
necessary that thare should be perfect co-operation in such matters as
circulating information and surveillance of individuals suspected of pro-
pagating sedition. For this purpose I would ask Your Excellency to
allow your Criminal Investigation Department to correspond directly and
freely on all such subjects, with my Inspector-General ot the District
Police who may be trusted to exercise discretion and judgment in such
matters. It is obvious that unless this procedure is adopted, delays are
likely to occur in obtaining information as regards the arrival or departure
of suspected individuals. In the same manner I will issue orders to my
Police to correspond freely in such matters with the Police in British India.
6. Your Excellency has been so kind as to ask my advice in regard
to measures which may prove effectual in keeping out of Native States the
insidious evil of sedition, and the manner in which Your Excellency
should assist towards this end. My knowledge of the conditions obtain-
ing in different Native States in India is very limited, but if I may
venture to express an opinion it would be that Your Excellency should as
often as possible write to some principal Ruling Princes and consult
with them as regards all important matters touching the welfare of
not only the Native States but also the Indian Empire as a whole
I look upon the Native States in India as the pillars of the
Empire, and I feel sure that the Ruling Princes will prove worthy of the
confidence and trust that may be reposed in them. Indeed it cannot be
otherwise ; because as Your Excellency rightly observes in your Kharita,
the interests of the .Government of India and of the Ruling Princes in
India are in this respect quite identical.
7. There are, however, two or three suggestions that I would make
- for Your Excellency's consideration; —
(1) The Government of India as well as the Provincial Governments
Urid Indian Durbars should as often as possible issue Press communiques for
the purpose of officially contradicting or correcting false allegations or
exaggerated reports, and call upon the newspapers that publish such things
to print formal contradiction or correction as directed. It is no longer safe or
desirable to treat with silent contempt any perverse statement which is pub-
licly made; because the spread of education, on the one hand, has created a
general interest in the news oi the country, and a section of the Press, on the
other hand, deliberately disseminates news calculated to promote enmity bet-
ween Europeans and Indians, or to excite hatred of Government and its
officers in the ignorant and credulous minds. Official warnings to editors,
publishers, proprietors and printers of the offending papers would also have
a salutary effect and would probably often save the necessity of public pro-
secutions which may possibly do more harm than good.
(2) The Native States should prohibit all clubs, libraries and other
institutions from subscribing to any papers or journals believed to be ins-
trumental in spreading sedition, and officials subscribing to or taking in
such literature should be told that they would be looked upon with dis-
favour. I have myself taken the initiative in this matter and have issued
orders to that effect.
(3) I am also inclined to think that itinerant agitators (often disguised
as Sanyasis) are not watched as thoroughly as they should be. Such persons
should be followed from province to province and regularly handed over lior
survedlance.
140 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF KOTA.
8. The experience that I have acquired within the last 25 yaftrs in
ruling my State, encourages me to venture upon a few observations which I
trust will be accepted in the spirit iu whith they are offered. I have al-
ready sai<i that my subjects are as a rule contented, peaceful and law-abiding.
For this blessing I have to'thank my ancestors. Thoy were singularly free
from all religious and* racial prejudices. Their wisdom and foresight induced
them to employ Hindus and Muhammadans, Europeans and Parsis alike in
carrying on the administration, and they reposed entire confidence in their
officers, whatever religion, race, sect or creed they belonged to. Hence it
followed that in the early part of the last century Raja Chundoo Lai was
Minister of Hyderabad for over a quarter of a century. Tha two Daftardars
(Record-keepers of the State) were Hindus whose descendants still enjoy the
j i»irs, offices and honours conferred by my predecessors. Inheriting as I
did the policy of my forebears, I endeavoured to follow in their footsteps.
My present Minister, the highest official in the State, is, as Your Excellency
is aware, a Hindu. One of my four Moin-ul-Mahams is Mr. Casson Walker
whose services hnve been lent to me by the Government of India. The
Secretary to ray Government in the Revenue Department is Mr, Dunlop
who has retired from the British service and Mr, Hankin, who is a Govern-
ment of India official, is the Inspector-General of my District Police. Al-
though I am a strict Suuni myself, some of my Muharnmadan noblemen and
high officers of the State are Shias. Arabs and other Muhammadan races
number among my State officials, Hindus of all sects, creeds, and denomi-
nations serve in my State and many hold high positions. The Revenue ad-
ministration of one half of my State is at present entrusted to two Parsis
who are Subadars (Commissioners of Divisions). It is in a great measure to
this policy that I attribute the contentment and well-being of my dominions.
Your Excellency will, therefore, quite understand how gratified I was to learn
of the vfise, generous, and liberal policy pursued by Your Excellency and
the Secretary of State for India in giving effect to the principles, announced
in the Queen's Proclamation of 1858 and solemnly reaffirmed in the King-
Emperor's gracious message to the Princes and Peoples of India in 1908, by
appointing an Indian as a member of Executive Council and two Indians
as members of the Council of the Secretary of State. This liberal policy as
also the enlargement of the Legislative Councils will, I earnestly trust,
serve to allay the present unrest and to remove altogether the seditious
movement which is happily confined to a very small minority.
9. I am a great believer in conciliation and repression going hand in
hand to cope with the present condition of India which is but transitory.
While sedition should be localised and rooted out sternly and even merci-
lessly, deep sympathy and unreserved reliance should manifest themselves
in all dealings with loyal subjects withouc distinction of creed, caste or
colour. I am exceedingly glad that this view has commended itself to Your
Excellency and I feel sure that the Indian Empire has now entered on a new
and brighter era of peace and prosperity under the benign reign of His
Majesty tlie King-Emperor.
(3) From His Highness the Maharao of Kota, dated the 28th August 1909.
After compliments. — I beg to acknowledge the receipt of Your Excellen-
cy's Kharita of the 6th August intimating that in Your Excellency's opinion
the time had come when concerted action should be taken between the Gov-
ernment of India and the Ruling Princes against all persons endeavouring
ffiS HIGHNESS ItfCJS MAFLVilAJA OF KOTA. Ut
to spread seditious xkctrines and to incite feelings of hostility among the
people against the constituted forms of Government.
So far as my State is concerned I am happy to be able to inform Your
Excellency, with the utmost confidence, that the baleful disease of sedition
is absolutely unknown and, so far. no members of the party of sedition,
either openly or disguisedly, have attempted to preach their noxious
doctrines among my people. They probably were all aware that any such
attempt would not be tolerated for a moment and that, if made, the
persons concerned would be immediately turned out of the State.
Knowing that my people were engrossed in their own agricultural
pursuits, that only an infinitesimal minority ever read a newspaper and
that the knowledge that in certain remote parts of India a disloyal faction
had endeavoured to foster ill-feeling to the British Government and had
even perpetrated murderous and violent acts was confined to a few of the
higher and official classes, I, at first, did not consider it desirable to excite
the childlike curiosity of my people to know what it was all about, and thua
draw their attention to the fact that such feelings did unfortunately exist and
that unlawful acts of sedition had occurred in India, by promulgating
through the State special orders dealing with sedition and with explosive
substances. Moreover, the promulgation of such orders was not really
necessary seeing that, although justice is administered on the lines of the
British Codes, personal lule in the Kota State has not been entirely
abandoned for rule by legislation and the Kota Courts would have no
hesitation in trying a person for an offence not specially or very definitely
defined in the Penal Code if directed to do so by the Durbar.
But although the issue of such orders was quite unnecesary so far as
the Kota State was concerned, yet cases of attempts to preach sedition
against the British Government) having been discovered in other Native
States, I thought it desirable to show the sedition-mongers in other parts
of India that the Kota Durbar was ready to do all they could, however
slight their power might be, to assist the British Government, a Govern-
ment to whom the State was bound by feelings of the deepest loyalty,
devotion and gratitude, to stamp out sedition. Such action seemed likely
to deter sedition-mongers from attempting to visit the State for the fur-
therance of their detestable ideas.
I accordingly issued orders on the 26th July 1909, which, I hope, will
effectually prevent any attemepts in future in my State either to make
seditious utterances; or to commit acts of violence by explosive sutstances.
Copies of my orders have, I understand, been forwarded to the Hon'ble
the Agent to the Governor-General and have perhaps by now been
submitted for Your Excellency's information. I trust that Your Excel-
lency may be pleased to approve of them.
Special orders for the prevention and punishment of persons attempt-
ing to incite sedition or commit acts of violence by means of explosive
substances on the lines of the British Acts having thus been promulgated,
there only remains for me to reply to Your Excellency's auggestiou regard-
ing the advantage to be obtained by co-operation in certain matters such
as in circulating information and watching suspicious characters,
I venture to state that I am entirely in favour of the adoption of Your
Excellency's suggestion which, if followed, should be of much practical
value.
112 flIS HIGHNESS THE BEOuM OF BHOPAL.
I am happy to be able to inform Your Excellency that in this re?pect
also I have been so fortunate as to have been able to anticipate Your
Excellency's kinl advice. Trie preventive measures already taken should,
I think, be sufficient to prevent sedition-mongers establishing any footing
in my State, and I would only add that the task of watching suspicious
characters will be greatly facilitated if information, when available, of the
probable visit of such persons to my State can be communicated by the
British authorities.
In conclusion, 1 beg to assure Your Excellency that, if any further action
in this matter on my part is desired, I will be only too happy to do my
utmost to carry into effect the wishes which Your Excellency may be
graciously pleaseu1 to communicate to me.
(4) From Her Highness the Begum of Bhopal, dated the 4th September
1909.
After compliments.— I have to thank Your Excellency for your
Kharita of the 6th August in which Your Excellency has asked my advice
as to the beat way of keeping sedition out of Native States.
I quite agree with Your Excellency in thinking that the seditionists
are working not only against the British Administration, but also against
the established order of Government and society. It is apparent that we
are all in the same boat and those, therefore, who are working against the
established order of Government are working against us.
The various Native States of India are so different to each other in the
characteristics of their peoples and other circumstances of equal importance,
that it is only the individual rulers of these States who can gauge these
matters accurately in so far as their respective peoples are concerned. With
due consideration to these circumstances, every Ruling Chief must, I
suppose, have, on the lines of the steps taken in this connection by Your
Excellency's Government, already thought out the best means for keeping
or rooting sedition out of his State. In respect of all this important
matter, I can, generally speaking, think of the following measures : —
I. The seditious newspapers to be suppressed and their career of
mischief brought to a summary end.
II. Every Ruling Chief to establish, or if need be, to increase the
strength of Secret Police within his territory.
III. All Ruling Chiefs to co-operate with each other in the matter of
supplying information and watching bad characters, The Indian Govern-
ment to be kept informed through the Political Department.
IV. Supervision of teachers in the schools. A little education in
etiquette and some religious instruction to be introduced into the curricu-
lums everywhere, so that proper foundation be laid of that loyalty and
obedience without which education is not worthy of its name.
V. Exemplary punishments to be meted out to seditionists whenever
caught working to attain their nefarious ends.
As far as my own State is concerned, I have every hope that the steps
that have already been taken will be fruitful of good results and that my
people will, God willing, remain as froe from all contamination as they did
duiiug the troubled days of 1857.
fiJtg HIGHNESS THE! MAHARAO RAJA OF BUNDI.
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF ORCHHA.
(5) From His Highness the Maharao Raja of Bundi, dated the 6th Sep-
tember 1909.
After compliments. — lam in receipt of Your Excellency's very kind
Rharita, dated the 6th August, from Simla, on the subject of the suppres-
sion of seditious movements in the Native States, and beg to thank Your
Excellency very much for your kindness in asking my advice on so import-
ant a subject.
As remarked, the matter is'Ycally one in which the interests of the
Paramount Power and the Ruling Chiefs are indentical -f and I beg to
assure Your Excellency that I am always ready to co-operate with and
serve the British Government, as far as lies in my power, in any matter
that concerns the welfare of the empire.
The peace and benefits which India and the Ruling Princes have enjoyed
Under the kind aegis of the benign and merciful British Government aro
well known ; and it is therefore our bounden duty to see that
nothing should happen within our territories that may be prejudicial to
the peaceful administration of the empire.
1 have already issued a notification throughout my State warning all
my subjects and officials against the spread of sedition and disloyalty to
the established Government and imposing upon them the duty of arresting
any dangerous or suspected persons whenever found in the State. Through
Your Excellency's kindness no dangerous persons seem to have visited my
State as yet, but if any venture to* do so in the future they will be prompt-
ly arrested and deterrent punishment awarded them and information
thereof will be submitted to the Political Officer for communication to
Your Excellency,
From the copy of the notification which I beg to enclose herewith
for Your Excellency's kind perusal, Your Excellency will, I hope, note
that it has been printed in the Bundi dialect so that everybody might be
able to understand it and act accordingly. A reward has been promised
to all who help in this desirable object.
(6) From His Highness the Maharaja of Orchha, dated the 23rd Sep-
tember 1909.
After compliments. — J thankfully beg to acknowledge the receipt of
Your Excellency's kind and welcome letter of the 6th August 1909. Really
I am very much obliged to Your Excellency for kindly inviting my opinion
on an important subject which greatly concerns the Indian Government.
It is evident from some cases of sedition occurred in certain Native
States that the seditious party is endeavouring to get a footing in the
Native States. As far as I can think I am perfectly sure that no Native
Chief in India will ever like this disloyal movement getting into his State.
The loyalty and the devotion of the Indian Chiefs for the benign British
Government are well known to Your Excellency. Moreover as well stated
in Your Excellency's letter, I quite agree with Your Excellency that
sedition and anarchism are injurious not only to the Indian Government
but also to all administrations aud the established order pf society, the
J44 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF ORCHHA.
prevention ot which is beneficial both to the Paramount Power and the
Indian Chiefs alike and therefore I ana perfectly sure that no Chief will
ever sympathise with such agitators and will spare no means to prevent
such agitation and punish the agitators.
I am heartily thankful to Your Excellency fur the assurance Your
Excellency has given in the letter about the non-interference pol'cy of the
Government in the internal affairs of the Native States.
I beg to inform Your Excellency that my State is quite free from this7
sedition and anarchism. My subjects have no such disloyal feelings up till
now, and I pray that the Almighty will always be pleased to preserve their
such feelings. However as a precautionary measure I have addressed a
message in vernacular to my subjects for general information and warning,
asking them to act up to my orders, to continue such loyal feelings towards
His Majesty's Imperial Government, the translation of which I annex here-
with for Yoar Excellency's kind perusal.
Over and above this I have instructed my officers to be always on the
watch for any suspicious character and to have a very keen eye over his
movements, arrival, departure, &c., and to inform the neighbouring district
officers when necessary without any delay, and I hope the neighbouring:
district officers will adopt the same measure. As far as I know I think
1 have adopted such a policy that sedition is not probable in rny State, and
it is not likely that any suspicious character if imported from outside may
escape detection and punishment,
I am doubtful how far my humble opinion will meet with Your Excel-
lency's approval, however I beg to say that if Your. Excellency sees no-
objection to such a course I would like to convene a meeting of my brother
Chiefs of Bundelkhand at a convenient place to all, and will put before
them my suggestions regarding the prevention of sedition and after discuss-
ing the necessary points with them on the important subject of inter-statal
co-operation I shall then be in a position to inform Your Excellency of the
final result of our meeting, and i hope this will produce better results. I
need hardly inform Your Excellency that my house has ever remained
loyal to the British Government. The services rendered by my ancestors
in the trying time of the Mutiny of 1857 are well known to Your Excellency.
As for myself T respectfully beg to inform you that I was not wanting in
those feelings of loyalty to the British Crown and as a proof of this °my
services are well known to Your Excellency when in 1893 dakaiti was
raging in Lalitpur and Gwalior territories and was spreading in the whole
of Bundelkhand. On this and on all former occasions rny loyalty has been
amply appreciated and rewarded by the benign British Government from
time to time. Let me assure Your Excellency that I always pray for the
pouce and prosperity of the benign British rule under whose fostering care
the whole of India enjoys every blessed happiness of justice, order and tran-
quillity.
In conclusion, let me express my hearty thanks for the keen interest
Your Excellency always takes in the welfare of Indian Chiefs generally and
my State and myself particularly.
HIS HIGHNESS THE RAJA OF DEWAS, (SENIOR BRANCH.) 145
(7) From His Highness the Raja of Dewas, Senior Branch, dated the
28th September 1909.
After compliments. — It is with extreme pleasure and with intense feel-
ings of thankfulness that I acknowledge Your Excellency's Khaiita, dated
the (kh August 1909, regarding the .suppression of sedition which is of
equal importance both to the Paramount British Government and the
Ruling Princes. I am in absolute agreement with Your Excellency's view-
that the time has arrived when we may be well prepared to work hand ia
hand with each other in circulating information and watching suspicious
characters connected with sedition. Of course, Your Excellency has been
pleased to state in your Kharita that there is no contemplation of formulat-
ing general rules or general course of action which may involve interference
in the internal government of Native States. I for one fully realise Your
Excellency's sincere feelings in this matter and assure Your Excellency
that not for a moment did I doubt otherwise. Further I am deeply indebted
to Your Excellency for offering assistance to Native States generally
and to my State in particular, in case of need. Here I need hardly write
that my State and myself are always ready at the service, whenever
required, of His Imperial Majesty King Edward VII, Emperor of India,
and his Empirer
2, There can be no question, as Your Excellency expressed in your
Kharita,. that the party of sedition is endeavouring to extend its dark and
malicious- operation? even in Native States, It is a well-known fact that
the endeavours of the seditious party are directed not only against the
Paramount British Government,, but against all constituted forms of govern-
ment in India, through an absolutely misunderstood sense of ' Patriotism "
and through an attachment to the popular idea of " Government by people/'
when every level-headed Indian must admit that India generally has not
in any way shown its fitness for a popular Government. Personally, if I
were to say a few words on this subject, I should declare that it is
historically proved and even well realised by all sound-minded people that
India cannot really attain to the standard of popular Government as
understood in the West. Reasons for this are manifold and I feel, I may
be digressing from the main point contained in Your Excellence's Kharita,
if I were to write those reasons here in full.
3. I consider it a great privilege to have been asked by Your Excellency
to offer rny suggestions for suppressing the seditious movement. Now
I proceed to make the following few suggestions,, which may, I hope, be of
some use in dealing with sedition throughout British India and Native
States, if they recommend themselves to Your Excellency.
(1) Education,— It is a well-known fact that the germs of the present
unrest in India were laid in that benefactor of human race, viz*, education.
It sounds strange, but there it exists. It is not that education itself is
injurious, but much depends on the principles underlying an educational
movement. In my opinion, the higher education, temporarily at least, may
be made so dear as to prevent every ordinary man who generally has not
got the instinct for taking the best advantage of education, and the whole
system of education, from primary to higher, may well be combined, as far
as practicable, with moral education. Personally, I am all for increasing
educational institutions for the use of the public ; but I feel that above
primary education^ which, I must say, ought to be as free as possible and
within the reach of almost every person, it is certainly now-a-days a point
H6 HIS HIGHNESS THE RAJA OF DEWAS, (SENIOR BRANCH.)
for discussion as to whether higher education may not be made dear, I
realise the difficulties of this question and would suggest that at least the
principles of moral education may be more widely attended to in the edu-
cational line and that every head of an educational institution may be strict-
ly directed to prevent boys and girls from reading or obtaining seditious
writing or mixing with seditious gangs or meetings. Of course, a teacher
cannot be responsible for a student after his school-hours; but it may be
circulated to all the parents of the boys and girls, who wish to enter their
children in schools or colleges, that they will have to sign a bond for their
good and clean conduct in respect of seditious movements, before they
are admitted, and thus put the responsibility on the parents as well.
Further, all private educational institutions may be obliged to conform to
the above-mentioned principles.
(2) Press. — Really speaking a good many of the present newspapers
in India deserve to be totally stopped. But there is one point which may
be taken fully into consideration. It is this, If the Government stop
newspapers totally, there is always a likelihood of more secret societies
being formed to exchange views on malicious and dishonourable topics.
Hence, the question arises whether it is better to allow views on the
movement to be given a free or controlled vent to them and thus get an
idea of the movement, or to suppress the publicity of the views totally
and thus give a chance to further secret societies. At the same time
Indian papers have reached a stage when they cannot be allowed to be
published without more control, because they have been the cause of
freatest harm. Hence I suggest that both in British India and in Native
tates, the respective local Governments may appoint a committee or a
person or an officer to review all the writings of the Press, excepting those
pertaining to commerce, medicine, health and general advertisements, and
those writings that are to be published under the orders of the Paramount
British Government or under tha orders of the Durbars of the Native
States, before they are published, and thus prevent the minds of the people
from being corrupted for nothing. Further, any violation of laws framed
for directing the Press, may be severely and unfailingly checked. These
remarks mr\y also apply equally well to all kinds of publications and
writings, such as pamphlets and books.
(3) Summary trials and political punishments.— It is, in my
opinion, very necessary that seditious offences being political offences,
they may be disposed of in a summary method and much publicity to
the proceedings may be stopped, because this for nothing creates misunder-
standings and gives room for unnecessary criticism. This may be extended
practically throughout British India by the Paramount Government of
India and by the Ruling Princes of all the Native States throughout their
territories. In this connection, it must be stated that, whenever possible,
the Political Law, on the lines of Act III of 1818, may be enforced in more
instances and offenders may either be deported to other places from their
own native places or kept in local jails till further orders, when it is
thought proper to release them. I lay great stress on these two points and
feel confident that, though they may appear arbitrary to some
to start with, yet these methods of dealing with political offenders in
India are quite suited to the country and the people and may prove of
immense help to the British Government and to the Native States in tha
end.
HIS HIGHNESS THE NAWAB OF lOTTlC. 147
(4) Sadhus and Fakirs and others of the kind. — Under the guise of
religious mendicants, it is quite probable that many Sadhus and Fakirs and
others of the kind move about preaching or communicating seditious views.
Such people may be strictly watched and every person, who suspects any of
these religious mendicants in any way connected with sedition, may be
made compulsory by law to report the matter under penalty. Further, if
such mendicants live or assemble in private houses temporarily or
permanently, the owner of the house may be made by law responsible.
The same remarks may apply to religious Samajes or bodies,
4. The above-stated are the few suggestions of mine for suppressing
sedition in British India and for the Native Princes to do the same in
their territories, which, I hope, may recommend themselves to Your
Excellency, and I trust, Your Excellency will excuse me if there is delay
in replying to Your Excellency's Kharita, but 1 can assure Your
Excellency that the delay is due to the weightiness of the subject.
5. In conclusion, I need hardly assure Your Excellency of my
readiness to do my utmost to put down sedition within the limits of my
territory and whenever necessary to be of help to thej Paramount Govern-
ment outside the State, because I fully realise that the interests of the
Paramount British Government and my State are quite identical in this
matter, and further it is, I consider, my duty to be, as I have said above,
ready at the service of His Imperial Majesty the King-Emperor, and to
put a stop to anything improperly said, written or done against His
Imperial Majesty's Government.
(8) From His Highness the Nawab of Tonk, dated the 29th
September, 1909.
After compliments. — I beg to acknowledge the receipt of Your Excel-
lency's kind Kharita, dated the 6th August 1909, received through the
Political Agent, Haraoti and Tonk, and beg to express my heartfelt thanks
that I have been called on to express an opinion on a matter which 13 of
equal concern both to the Imperial Government and to the Native States.
I greatly regret that there should exist such persons who have adopted or
may adopt an attitude of sedition and insubordination against the British
Government, They seem to have forgotten the innumerable obligations
which they owe to the British Government — a Government whose sole
care is to provide for the prosperity and welfare of the people of India ;
who has taught them civilisation, opened paths of progress for them and
who preserves peace and order. Surely it is the greatest ingratitude to
adopt a hostile attitude against such Government.
It is not secret from Your Excellency or the Imperial Government thafi
I am a loyal and staunch friend of the British Government and wish to
assure Your Excellency that I shall never deviate from this path and will
ever remain a loyal supporter of the British Government. The ties that
connect this State with the Imperial Government are stronger than those
of other States, inasmuch as this State was granted by the British Govern-
ment itself. I thus naturally look upon the extermination of the enemies
of the British Government as my bounden duty, and it was with a view to
prevent the propagation of sedition that six months ago I passed an Act,
and as necessity may arise from time to time necessary additions will be
made therein prohibiting my people from any connection or correspondence
148 HIS HIGHNESS THE NAWAB OF JAOHA.
with those who have made it their profession to preach sedition againsfc
the British Government and directing them not to cherish or entertain any
ideas antagonistic to the constituted form of Government, otherwise they
will suffer severe penalties.
I concur with Your Excellency's proposal that the British Government
and the Native States should inform each1 other ot the arrival and move-
ments of any seditious persons, and I assure Your Excellency that this
principles shall be rigidly followed in my State.
(y) From His Highness the Nawab of Jaora, dated the 30th September
1909.
After compliments. — I beg to acknowledge, with thanks, the receipt
of Your Excellency's Kharita of the 6th August 1909.
I myself had, some months -ago, conceived the idea expressed in the first
part of Your Excellency's letter about sedition, and dreading lest its
progress should reach the Hints of my State, I had taken such steps as I
could to guard against the contending evil and influence.
I might add, for Your Excellency's information, that on the 30th
October 1898, the Jaora Durbar communicated to the Political Agent in
Malwa that 'the Jaora State does not contain either the admirers of Shivaji
or the followers of Tilak and is therefore entirely free from any sedition
or mischievous agitation. The ruler and his subjects are as ever united and
strong in their loyalty and allegiance to the Crown * * * if there
happens to ba any (seditious case) in future, the Durbar would lose no
time in dealing strongly with the offender and in bringing the matter to
your notice."
I am very glad to say that what I declared ten months ago, holds true
down to this clay and I confidently trust that the State shall as hitherto
remain free from the taint for ever.
I beg to assure Your Exceency that any measures other than those
described above which Your Excellency's Government may suggest or
prescribe shall be most willingly acted upon by the Durbar,
I might also draw Your Excellency's attention to the Press. I admit
thai; the Press has much to do in elevating mankind, but also think that
without restriction or control, the Press is as just apt to err on the wrong
side as to mark the right path on the other. I might go further and say
that it is the Press or certain papers solely that have been the cause of
widening the gulf between the rulers and the ruled, and that they are
mainly responsible for the present situation. They have been the instru-
ments of disseminating seditious ideas and thoughts among the public.
Masses of the Indin population of any sect or creed are loyal to the core of
their heart to the British Government. It is therefore necessary that the
Press should not be allowed to play too freely with the ignorant public and
excite religious feelings and susceptibilities of one community against the
other. Consequently some measures are imperative to effect a closer
scrutiny and control over the Press.
My noxt point is education. Religious education is the key-note to
the formation of character. This important branch has to be neglected
in schools, because owing to diverse creeds and nationalities, the Govern-
ment cannot undertake to impart religious instruction and the people
fitS tttOilNfiSS TtfE RAJA O**RTJTLAM.
themelves do not seem to. realise that ideal, as their sole anxiety is to
give them English education as soon as their children are fit to receive ifc.
With religious education there is also a subservience of indigenous langu-
age or mother tongue, which keeps back the educated youths from imbib-
ing properly the uoble traditions of their ancient lineage and family.
They join the school early where they spend only a few hours a day and
the rest with toad associates at home. If residential institutions were
established with every school, it will have a beneficial effect on the mould-
ing of the character of the boys. As for the required funds, the Govern-
ment cannot of course, take the whole burden upon its shoulders and the
people must come forward to help themselves.
The desirable results may also be secured in some measure by the
selection of good teachers, men who are endowed with noble ideas, matured
council and judgment and free from any of the dangers of a little know-
ledge. It matters little to what religion these may profess to belong, since
the analysis of all religions in the world shows in its composition the
elements of the same code of morals and virtue. The pupils may safely be
put in charge of such good and able hands not during school hours only,
but for the whole period of their educational life.
Another cause which has asisted in bringing on the present state of
affairs is the treatment of seditionists according to law. Undoubtedly the
British Govenment cannot but deal with such cases according to law, but
what I mean is that the rigour of the law in particular matters calculated
to endanger the Sovereign's prestige should be severe and quick. Regular
trials like those that have recently been held in Bengal do, in my humble
opinion, more harm than good, as the longer the proceedings are protract-
c-J ; the greater are the chances for craftiness to do its work.
1 feel under deep obligation to Y'our Excellency for your so kindly
offering assistance to my State, and beg to say that whenever I aud my
State stand in need of help, I shall most certainly approach Government.
(10) From His Highness the Raja of Ratlam, dated the 6th October 1909.
After compliments. — In acknowledging the receipt of Your Excellency's
Kharita regarding measures to be ad opted against the party of sedition
which has been found endeavouring to establish branches in certain Native
States 1 would, in the first place, express my feeling of gratitude and pride
that a statesman like Your Excellency should consider me worthy of
being the recipient of your confidence and take counsel with me in this
matter, which is indeed of grave importance both to the Supreme
Government and to the Native Princes.
2. In the second place, I am delighted to be able to observe that within
limits of my State no seditious or revolutionary movement exists. On
the contrary, all my subjects and officials love the British Government as
much as they love me; and should any evil-minded persons enter this
State clandestinely to sow seeds of disaffection towards the Government,
they will, I certainly prophesy, meet with scant success and on being
detected will certainly fare very badly indeed.
3, The blessing of peace under the enlightened and benign British
Government, which blessing was unknown in olden times, is threatened
by this baneful movement ; and it is the duty of every Native Prince to
150 HIS maETNESSJHE RAJA OF RATLAM.
readily combine with the Paramount Power to eradicate the rank growth
of seditious and revolutionary spirit observable in a few ungrateful persons
belonging to two or three communities, who have profited the most by
the educational facilities graciously oftered by the civilised British rule.
4. To be able to thwart the machinations of the party of sedition, we
must have a clear notion of their modius operandi. The society seems to
have been divided into four departments, viz. — (1) the mechanical, (2)
educational, (3) the journalistic, and (4?) the spiritual.
5. We have therefore to deal with (i) the actual murderers who are
the maddened school-boys or collegians ; (2) the imparters of national
education, who literally as well as metaphorically teach the young idea
how to shoot ; (3) the ultra-patriotic journalists who always criticise
Government policy adversely and try to m ike people believe that there is
legalised and systematic loot in the present regime ; and (4) missionaries or
religious workers who are by no means as innocent as lambs and work
on the religious sentiments of the villagers and the ignorant, whose
number is legion.
6. Now, the Penat Code, the Explosive Substances Act and other Acta
passed frotn time to time for maintaining law and order will look after
the first department effectually. It is, however, necessary to advise that
the Government will lose no time in framing new laws whenever the
existing legislation will be found inadequate to cope with any emergency.
7. It has been observed in a majority of cases that it is among the
student population that the agitation has most found a home. The conspir-
ators have found that their older countrymen are not amenable to their
preachings which are apparently shortsighted and of a disastrous character
and have therefore worked on the highly impressionable youthful minds.
The University reform scheme will -deal with this department. The
selection of teachers, especially of heads of schools and colleges, should be
carefully made, or the young mind will be allowed to be poisoned till the
disease will become chronic and incurable.
8. The Newspaper (Incitement to Offences) Act deals with the journals
which are too patriotic But legal technicalities which are growing more and
more complex every day aftord so many loop-holes through which the offen-
ders often escape when prosecuted. This therefore necessitates the
organisation of a press censorship in this country. Under the present
circumstances the courts of justice on the publication of seditious matter
in a paper can rule whether it should not cease to exist; but, as
pointed out above, the court's decision is hampered by legal techni-
calities of an intricate nature. The formation of a committee of press
censors should act as a wholesome control on cheap and nasty journals.
So much for the third department.
9. But the last department of the society of sedition, viz., the spiritual
has not been hitherto paid any attention to.
10. That Hindus and for the matter of that all oriental peoples are
swayed more by religion than by anything else is quite patent to the party
of sedition as it is to the Government themselves. The latter have hitherto
adopted, and rightly adopted the policy of allowing the different com-
munities perfect freedom in the matter of their religious beliefs So much
so that even public nuisances have been tolerated if oom.nitted by any
BIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA Off KISttANGARH. 151
section in the name of religion. As an example in point, the feeling of
tenderness to animal life, even vermin life, shown by Jains and some
Hindus has been respected by Government to such an extent that they
refrain from enforcing the destruction of rats recommended by eminent
medical authorities as a preventive measure against plague. Perhaps so far
the Government have been acting wisely ; but when it is noticed that sedi-
tionists are seeking to connect their anarchical movement with religion,
and the political Sadhu is abroad, it is high time to change the policy o£
non-interference in so-called religious affairs.
11, In the name of religion the Thugs murdered the innocent people,
but Government was not deterred from exterminating thuggism from their
anxiety not to interfere with so-called religious beliefs. Sati also has been
abolished, though it had been practised under the sanction of religious
books.
)2r The new religion which is being now preached by so-called religioua
associations under the pretence ot reviving old religions is nothing but the
cult of the swadeshi, the adoration of the motherland, self-respect, worship
of heroes like Shivaji, and the doctrine of India for the Indians only.
13. It pains me to write as above; but already religion has played a
prominent part in this matter, for religious books were found in almost
every search made for weapons and bombs. The role of the priest or the
Sadhu is most convenient, and rulers have bowed and do bow to religious
preachers. These people generally distort the real import of religious pre-
cepts and thereby vitiate the public mind. The founders are sly enough
to flatter the Government by an occasional address breathing loyalty and
friendship ; but it is essential to check this sudden growth of piety and
religious propaganda,
14. These are my views of the present state of affairs. I have expressed
them freely.
15. To recapitulate, then, we must watch suspicious characters and
not allow them to enter our States and combine in circulating information
about the movements of such people. We must exercise due care in the
selection of at least the heads of the educational institutions, schools and
colleges. In the absence of censorship the Native States must prohibit
the circulation in their territories of the papers whose one object is to decry
everything British. We must view with sii3picion any sudden growth
of religious activity and we must set a good example by publicly express-
ing our horror of seditious and anarchical movements ; and this is the duty
we owe to the British Government who have secured to us our possession
of the States we rule over.
(11) From His Highness the Maharaja of Kishangarh, dated the 17th
October 1909.
After compliments, — I write to acknowledge the receipt of Your Excel-
lency's Kharita, dated Simla, the 6th August 1909, which was delivered to
me by the Resident, Colonel Showers, on the 24th ultimo. The subject is
not quite new to me, as I have been watching during the last two years,
with great concern, the trend of events in British India. The campaign of
vilification and calumny directed ungratefully against the Paramount Power
and its officers, whose sole object is India's peace and prosperity, has been
152 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF KTSHANGARH.
for a long time prosecuted by professional libellers whose wicked industry
has been aided by the intrigues of a few disappointed and over-ambitious-
young men. The evil has spread; it has infected certain Native States
and recent events of violence and lawlessness such as have shocked humani-
ty, go to show that the party of sedition has not yet slackened its efforts,
much less abandoned them. The Ruling Princes of India, even more than
the Paramount Power, are interested in stamping out the evil \ and no one
is better supplied with weapons than they to scatter and defeat the forces
of anarchy should they make appearance within their dominions.
I feel quite flattered in being asked to co-operate with the Paramount
Power in righting a common enemy ; and I take this occasion to assure
Your Excellency that no sacrifice will be deemed by me too great to make
in the interests of the Government, whose protection and friendship my
State has uninterruptedly enjo}7ed for nearly a century.
A regards the present position of affairs in my State, I fully believe
that it is absolutely free so far from the taint of sedition, such as I have
described ab )ve ; and that the propagators of anarchical doctrines have
never thought it safe to direct their mischievous activities in any part
of my territory. I do not apprehend that any of my subjects will ever
be tempted into the criminal folly of entertaining feelings of disaffection:
and ill-will against tbe British Government ; but what I do fear is that the
malignant insanity which has affected certain sections of the community
in British India will, if not checked at its source, continue to spread
through the laud, and some of my peaceful subjects may unwittingly be
involved in. the mischief. It is also probable that evil-minded persons,
finding their actions watched in British India may take advantage of our
less efficient police systems, and make use of our territory as centres from
•which to carry on their campaign against the Government. I Deed not say
I shall do all in my power to prevent this happening ; but at the same
time if I may say so, it is at an earlier stage that the mischief should be
checked, viz., before it has had time to spread beyond British India.
I am aware that much of the anarchical propaganda is diffused under
the seductive name of religion ; and hence in a great measure the difficulty
of detecting crime of this kind. I entirely concur with Your Excellency
that rather than wait for the advent of the evil, it would be wise to con-
cert measures in time for its prevention. I have directed my Council to
include in the schedule of offences all acts and omi&siona which have been
made penal in British India under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908,
the Newspaper (Incitement to OiTeaces) Act, 1908, the Prevention of Sedi-
tious Meetings Act, 1907 : offences of this nature will be considered equally
penal whether committed or intended to be committed in Kishangarh or
British India. The procedure, which I propose adopting with respect to
such seditious cases that may come to light, is that all trials will be held
in a summary way, by the Court in my State that can pass the highest
sentences ; and that all sentences passed will be final, subject only to my
confirmation. I cannot but think that long drawn-out trials in such cases
are an encouragement to, rather than a deterrent against, the continuance
of these offences. I will further order that it will be obligatory upon every
subject of mine to give forthwith to the nearest Magistrate or Police Officer
information of the commission or intention to commit any of the offences
alluded to above, whether in Kishangarh territory or British India. Any
one withholding information will be seriously dealt with ; so also any one
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARANA OP UDAIPUR, MKWAR, 153
harbouring or screening an offender of this class, whether he be my
subject or not.
To make ray views universally known, I also propose issuing a pro-
clamation on the occasion of the Dasehra, when all my nobles and high
officials will be assembled. I will then emphatically proclaim rny
utmost abhorrence and detestation of the vile deeds recently enacted in
British India and England ; and I will exhort my subjects to help me in
keeping out of my territory the enemies of the British Government under
whose aegis I am enabled to maintain a just and prosperous rule in the
State.
In circulating information and watching suspicious characters, I am
willing to co-operate with the British Government in any way it may be
desired and I will now take, moreover, a personal interest in the matter,
and be ready both in this and any other matter that may arise to devote my
utmost endeavours to the assistance of the Paramount Power.
Thanking Your Excellency again for consulting me.
(12) From His Highness the Mah.irana of Udaipur, Mewar, dated the
9th October 1909.
After compliments,— I write to acknowledge, with thanks, the receipt
of Your Excellency's Kharita of the 6th August, asking my advice as re-
gards measures to be adopted in connection with the mischievous efforts
of some seditious people working in certain parts of British India with a
view to create disquietude in the peaceful administration of the British
Government and to spread their malevolous influence in other quarters as
well. 1 deeply regret that those ill-advised people, under disguise of doing
good to their country, have created an agitation which|is detrimental
to all good government and social administration. I believe, and every
one will agree with me, that those mischievous people are auicidal in their
attempts and will briag ruin on themselves.
It is a great disgrace to their name as also their religious beliefs that
in spite of tli« great prosperity India has been enjoying under the British
regime, those people are acting in such an ungrateful way. I also endorse
the opinion that such seditious attempts must be nipped in the bud ; and
measures adopted by the British Government were undoubtedly expedient
on the occasion to preserve the peace of the country.
All Rulers of Native States should heartily co-operate in guarding
their respective subjects from mixing with those ill-advised people, who
devise such hateful conspiracies and agitations, and they should try their
best to realise the wishes of the Government of India on this occasion, nor
should they allow such agitations to spread in their respective territories.
I am, however, glad to declare that in my territory there is no sign of
any seditious movement at the present moment, and I hope there will be
none in the future too. As this State of Mewar always desires the welfare
of the British Government, its subjects will ever remain loyal, and will
always try to undo the efforts of the agitators against the British Govern-
ment. In case I discern any signs of such movements, I shall at once
adopt strong measures to suppress them. I have, with a yiew to warn
my subjects, already issued a proclamation to the effect that they should
not be misled by the wicked advice of mischievous agitators against tha
British Government.
154 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR,
I conclusion, I desire to express the high consideration which I enter*
tain for Your Excellency.
(13) From His Highness the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, dated the
28th October 1909.
After compliments. — I have much pleasure in acknowledging the re-
ceipt of Your Excellency's Kharifea, dated the 6th August 1909, conveying
Your Excellency's warm approval of my humble efforts in connection with
suppression of feelings of sedition and unrest that have, unfortunately, for
some time past, been prevailing in certain parts of the Indian Empire.
I am extremely glad to be able to tell Your Excellency that, with the
exception of one solitary instance which, as Your Excellency is perhaps
aware, was dealt with with the utmost promptitude possible, there has
been no sign of any unrest or disaffection in my territories, and I think I
can safely give Your Excellency my sincerest assurance that iny subjects,
faithful to the traditions of the past, entertain sentiments of profound loy-
alty and devotion to the Paramount Power. It is a matter of no less
gratification to me to add, for Your Excellency's information, that those
feelings of loyalty and devotion which both the ruling family and its sub-
jects have cherished as a sacred trust since the State was recruited under
tho segis of the British Raj have been strengthened by the notification
which, Your Excellency is aware, I took care to issue in 1907 as a precau-
tionary measure impressing upon my people in the strongest and clearest
terms possible that all feelings of anarchy and sedition are ruinous to the
peace of the country, and as such are looked upon by me with the deepest
abhorrence and detestation.
I need hardly submit to Your Excellency that, being fully alive to the
patent fact that it is of vital importance alike to the Paramount Power and
its feudatories to co-operate in preserving peace and order in the empire, I
have, since the first appearance of the signs of disaffection and discontent
among certain perverted and irresponsible people in British India, not only
kept a most watchful eye on my subjects, but have thought it fit to adopt
stringent measures to keep undesirable and suspicious characters out of
my State and to otherwise guard against any possible dissemination of any
seditious ideas among my people.
While heartily thanking Your Excellency for the honour done me by
kindly giving rne an opportunity to express my opinion on the delicate and
vexed question of how to suppress unrest and sedition in Native States gene-
rally, I venture to state that, so for as I am aware, the few incidents of a
seditious character that might come to notice in some of the Native States
are by no means of local origin, being entirely traceable to outside evil
influence. I for one, am firmly convinced of the staunch and unshaken
loyalty and devotion of the Indian Chiefs and their subjects, and think that
seditious movements or anything inimical to the interest of the British Raj
can find no footing there. But in view of the fact that dangerous elements
may enter State te-rritory secretly and unobserved and corrupt popular
minds, if proper watch is not kept on arrivals of such elements from out-
side, I consider that the Chiefs should exert their personal influence on
their subjects to prevent their imbibing poisonous ideas of sedition and
anarchy and should put down promptly and with a strong hand the least
symptom of demonstration that can even be remotely connected with sedition
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJ OF RANA BHOLPUE. 155
and unrest ; that secret and vigilant watch should be kept on the move-
ments of irresponsible and suspicious persons visiting the State territories ;
that circulation of disloyal and inflammatory literature should altogether
be put a stop to ; and that last, though not the least, particular care should
be taken to see that teachers and professors of schools and colleges in the
several States are men of high religious and moral principles, free from any
doubtful political views and ideals, so that the rising generation, under
their care, may grow to be perfectly loyal and faithful citizens of the
British Empire,
But to give a practical shape to these and similar other allied matters
and to achieve the best results, it is essential, I think for the Chiefs to
mutually co-operate and to have opportunities of freely exchanging their
views with one another. Considering the peculiar nature of the case, this
seems to me to be the most suitable means by which prompt and effective
measures could be taken to deal with the situation.
As regards the question as to how the desired co-operation may be
effected, I leave the matter to Your Excellency's deliberation and wise judg-
ment, I shall anxiously await Your Excellency's advice before I take any
further action in the matter.
(1 4) From His Highness the Maharaj Rana of Dholpur, dated the
30th October 1909.
After compliments, — Your Excellency's esteemed Kb arita of the 6th
August regarding the endeavours of the persons who are trying to spread
sedition in British India, as well as in certain Native States, was duly
received by me. 1 hasten to thank Your Excellency most cordially for the
timely advice and warning conveyed therein. I am quite alive to the fact
that the welfare of the Paramount Power is the welfare of the Native
States,
Although no signs whatsoever of the mischievous activities of the sedi-
tion-mongers have yet been discovered in my State, I have always been wide
awake in this connection, and the State authorities are under instructions to
be very vigilant and to be on the watch as regards the movements of
any suspicious characters. Moreover, with a view to dealing promptly with
any case of sedition that may occur in the future, as well as to minimising
any chances of such an emergency arising, I have issued certain orders, a
copy of which is herewith enclosed for favour of Your Excellency's perusal,
I feel highly honoured at Your Excellency asking my humble advice
in the matter,
My humble opinion is as follows:—
(a) A regular system of exchanging information between the Native
States and the British Police should be established, and whenever
necessary these reports regarding the movements of seditious
characters should be made by telegram.
(6) All the newspapars likely to publish seditious articles should be
severely censored, i.e.. more than they are now.
156 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF REWAtf.
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA Of JODHFUR.
(c) I have been observing carefully the judgment passed on persons
who have been convicted of sedition, and in my humble opinion
they have all been too leniently dealt with.
I assure Your Excellency that my State will always be at Your Excel-
lency's service and we will spill our blood if need be.
Any order or advice that Your Excellency may be pleased to favour us
with will be received with due respect.
(15) From His Highness the Maharaja of Rewab, dated the 2nd
November 1909.
After compliments. — I'am much obliged for Your Excellency's Kharita
of the 6th August last and for the compliment paid in consulting me about
a matter, which, as Your Excellency remarks, is one in which the interests
of the Paramount Power and Ruling Princes of India are identical.
2. I learn from newspapers that the seditionists have endeavoured to gain
& footing in certain Native States, but I believe they have been foiled. I
am glad to say that there has been no trouble in my State. My people are
loyal and I have heard of no attempts being made in that nefarious direction
in my territories. Should any steps be necessary executive or legal action
can be taken by me at once, and I wish to assure Your Excellency that the
Kewah Durbar will always most gladly co-operate with the officers of Your
Excellency's Government in the suppression of the seditious propaganda and
political crime. I have warned my chief officers in the districts and at the
head-quarters to keep a careful watch over suspicious characters so that
action may be taken here, if necessary, or information circulated to
Government officers in British India.
3. Thanking Your Excellency for the very kind offer of assistance.
(16) From His Highness the Maharaja of Jodhpur, dated the 3rd November
1909.
After compliments — I beg to acknowledge with many thanks the
receipt of Your Excellency's kind Kharita, dated the 6th August last.
2. I have been watching with much concern the movement set up by
sedition-mongers in certain Native States; but as regards Marwar, it is need-
less for me to assure Your Excellency that they will be given no quarter.
3. At present their modus operandi seems to be —
(1) the criminal use of explosives ;
(2) the preaching of sedition ;
(3) the dissemination of seditious writings, whether by leaflets,
pamphlets or periodicals ; and
(4) malevolent criticism of the actions of the Supreme Government.
4. With regards to (1 ), I have already taken the necessary steps by pro-
mulgating an Explosive Act in May last. It is my sin cere belief that the
stern attitude adopted by the Durbar will hardly afford any one the oppor-
tunity of creating a depot for, or of keeping or using any explosives in this
country, or of finding shelter in Marwar after they have been guilty of any ol
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF MYSORE. 157
the offences included under the said Act. To place matters on a constitu-
tional basis, I am, with the entire concurrence of my noble and peoples,
passing an Act making actions falling under categories (2), (3) and (4)
penal, and I take this opportunity of submitting a copy of the same for
Your Excellency's information.
5. I would at the same time ask Your Excellency's Government to
include offences under sub-heads (2), (3) and (4) in article 5 of our
Extradition Treaty,
6. For offences that are likely to fall under sections 3, 8, and 9 of my
Act, I would feel obliged, as Your Excellency has fore-shadowed in the 2nd
paragraph of Your Excellency's Kharita, if the Criminal Intelligence Depart-
ment be ordered to furnish my Durbar with such information as may enable
them to watch suspicious characters and to stop the circulation of seditious
writings.
7. This Durbar has ever been and shall always be ready to co-operate
wjth the Supreme Grovernment in any measure calculated to strengthen and
consolidate the British Empire and to arrest and eradicate seditious move-
ments.
8. It shall ever be my pleasant duty to do my best in concerting
measures against the enemy of the British Empire, whom I consider as my
personal enemy.
(17) From His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore, dated the llth
November 1909,
After compliments. — In acknowledging the receipt of Your Excellency's
Kharita of the 6th August last, I desire to express my appreciation of the
confidence which Your Excellency has reposed in me by writing so frankly
and fully on the subject of " Sedition in the Native States of India." The
question is one which has been the subject of anxious consideration on my
part, and I can assure Your Excellency that I shall never relax my efforts to
prevent the nefarious doctrines of sedition from taking root in Mysore. I
welcome the opportunity which Your Excellency has given me of expressing
my opinions on the subject with a view to our mutually co-operating
against a common danger,
It is, as Your Excellency points out, impossible to contemplate the adop-
tion of any general rules or general course of action, and I trust therefore
that Your Excellency will be satisfied with a general assurance on my part
that I am resolved to deal promptly and rigorously with anarchy and sedition
in whatever shape it may present itself within the borders of my State. No
preacher of seditious doctrines shall be permitted to poison the minds of my
subjects, and I shall promptly repress any attempt to sow the seeds of sedition
either by prosecuting the offending individual under the criminal law or
by expelling him from my dominions. My own magistracy and police are
on the alert to discover and report the advent of all seditious preachers,
and I shall, if necessary, issue renewed and stringent orders on the subject,
Jt is not, however, sufficient in my opinion for the Kuler of a Native State
to merely discountenance the open preaching of sedition, for I hold that
every Ruling Chief is bound to let it be clearly understood that he will view
with strong displeasure any person, however high his rank and however
valuable his public services, who in any way associates himself with doc-
trines which have produced the well known extremist party in British India.
158 TttS HIGHNESS THE M1HRUA OP MYSORE.
I shall not hesitate to express my reprobation of the entertainment of
extremist views whenever an occasion should arise.
As regards seditious writings in the newspapers, I have armed myself
by means of the Mysore Newspaper Regulation with ample and unrestricted
powers to prevent the circulation, through the press, of anarchical and
seditious propaganda among my subjects I venture to observe in this
connection that the distinguishing feature of the above Regulation is the
complete power which it gives to the Executive Government of my Statejto
deal with the evil against which the Regulation is aimed. From my point
of view it seems a cardinal error in a country like India to tie the hands of
the executive in dealing with the seditious press and to allow the tedious,
cumbersome and expensive machinery of the Courts of Law to decide the,
question of fact whether or not a particular newspaper is seditious and
should be suppressed. It is, I consider, essential that the executive Govern-
ment should have a free hand to deal promptly and vigorously with sedition
journalism without any interference from the Courts of Law, and I earnestly
commend this prominent feature of the Mysore Regulation to Your Excel-
lency's consideration. I may conclude this portion of my argument by
assuring Your Excellency that I have found this Regulation a most useful
and efficacious weapon against sedition. The attacks which have been
made in the press upon the legislation in question have caused me no
concern, for I feel thab it is only the actual evil-doers who will be affected
by the new law and that no really loyal subject need apprehend that his
legitimate rights will be in any measure curtailed thereby. I am convinced
that the Regulation was a wise and most necessary measure and I have
no intention of modifying it.
Your Excellency refers in the second paragraph of the letter under
reply to a necessity that may possibly arise for tha Indian Princes to
combine with the Government of India in some matters such as circulating
information and the surveillance of individuals suspected of sedition, On
this point I need hardly say that I should give my mist careful considera-
tion to any further suggestions that it may occur to Your Excellency's
G-overnmeut to make to me, I myself contemplate introducing on British
Indian lines a more careful supervision over the publications of the vernacular
press of my province by means of periodical extracts translated from the
various newspapers and printed for circulation among the principal officers
of the magistracy and police.
In conclusion, I may fairly claim for my own people that they have
always retained a vived recollection of the many benefits which Mysore
has received from British rule. With the exception of an ebullition on
the part of the losal press (the handiwork of a very small and
irresponsible section of the educated classes among my subjects influenced
by wild utterances of their brethren elsewhere), which was met anl promptly"
suppressed by the enactment of the newspaper Regulation, I can confidently
assert that there are no more loyal subjects of His Majesty in India than tho
people of Mysore. Anarchy and sedition have so far never taken rojt in
my dominions, and [ venture to say that universal feeling among
my subjects is one of friendliness, gratitude and loyalty towards the
Paramount Power, It is my fervent prayer that this sentiment may
long continue,
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF BARODA. 159
I deeply appreciate the feeling of consideration for myself to which
Your Excellency has given expression, I take this opportunity to express
on my part the great regard which I feel for Your Excellency, and with
feelings of high consideration and respect I beg to subscribe myself.
(18) From His Highness the Maharaja of Baroda, dated the 19th November
1909.
After compliments. — I have had the pleasure of receiving, by the
hands of my friend. Mr. Bosanquet, Your Excellency's esteemed Kbarita,
dated the 6th August last, conveying a warning that seditious people
are endeavouring to establish their evil doctrines and practices in the
Native States of India, and seeking my counsel as to how we can best
assist one another in stamping out the common enemy.
2, I am deeply concerned to find that a new element has unfortunately
been introduced into the country which not only aims at the embarrass-
ment of the British administration, but works openly or covertly against
the constituted order of society.
3, The extent to which sedition has actually spread in Native States is
not known to me. I was anxious to inform myself more fully on this
subject, and to know the condition of affairs in other States generally, before
replying to Your Excellency's Kharita. I was informed, however, through
the Resident that such information could not be communicated, and I was
referred to such reports as had appeared in newspapers. Judging from
these reports there has been trouble only in one or two States, and I trust
and hope that the evil will not spread any further,
4, Your Excellency rightly observes that the interests of the Ruling
Princes and the Paramount Power are identical, and I fully agree with
Your Excellency in thinking that much good may result from a full, frank
and friendly discussion on this grave question, It is obviously the duty of
every Government to stamp out the forces which make for anarchy and
sedition,
5, Since receipt of Your Excellency's Kharita I have obtained full
information from my Police Department, and have also caused a Note to be
drawn up by my Minister, with regard to the influence which itinerant men,
mostly from British territory, have sought to exert on my State, and the
precautions which have been taken, Copy of a Memorandum prepared
for my information by my Minister is enclosed for the information of your
Government, The subject receives the continuous attention of my officers,
and such measures as may be considered needful from time to time will be
adopted in the future,
6, I conclude by assuring Your Excellency that lam deeply conscious
of my own responsibility in preserving peace and tranquillity in my State.
I shall welcome any opportunities for a close consultation in these matters
with your Government, whenever necessary; and I shall ever be ready to
cordially respond to any reasonable call for co-operation and assistance in
repressing anarchy and sedition.
7^ With an expression of the high consideration I entertain for Your
Excellency, &c.
160 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA SCINDIA OF GWALIOR.
Af milter's Not*
Itinerant lecturers from outside occasionally visit the State of Baroda with the
object of preaching reform ition, or greater dovotiou to religion, or the encouragement
of goods of Indian manufacture, &c. In course of these lectures, which are themselves
harmless, doctrines are sometimes introduced which are objectionable. The Police
have instructions to bo watchful, and take the necessary action in such cases,
2. It appears that in the course of 18 months from the beginning of the year 1908,
there ware some thirty visitors, mostly from British India, whose movements were
watched by the Police, Most of them were harmless lecturers who spoke on the
Swadeshi movement, on unity between Hindus an I Muhammad-ins, on the preserva-
tion of cow*, on industries, o*a export of grain, on national education and physical
culture, on the four stages of life an I on caste, on the caste rights of goldsmiths and
blacksmiths, on the Hindu, Muhammadan, Christian and Buddhist religions, on Indiana
in South Africa, on the Vedas and the V edic religion, and on similar subjects. A few
of these visitors spoke on subjects of a distinctly political character or in a tone which
was inflammatory ; they were all watched, and aoon left the State. In some other
cases, the subject of the proposed lectures was the Swadeshi movement, but as tha
speakers were known to be political agitators, no meetings were permitted to be
held.
3. Within the last few years, the Residency also brought to the notice of thii
Government a n-imber of .cases in which itinerant preachers from outside entered the
State with the object of disseminating their views and doctrines among the people,
His Highuess's Government have responded to the.se friendly communications in every
instance, have supplied information when information was asked for, have made
enquiries and have taken the necessary action when any action was called for.
4. Newspapers in this ^tate. which are in thsir infancy, aud generally uniformed,
at times write articles in connection with these movements. Whenever anything of an
objectionable character is published in them, the editors concerned are sent for and
reprimanded, and in one recent case, the editor publicly apologised for his indiscreet
writings. The Rules relating to Printing Presses and Newspapers in the State, framed
many years ago, have recently baen revised in view of the present state of political
unrest in some parts of British India, and the question of a further revision, if need
be, is always before the eyes of the Govern ment.
5. Teachers and pupils of the several educational institutions in the State have hith-
erto held themselves aloof from associating themselves with political movements, and
taking any part in organising and carrying on p >litical agitation. The principles
laid down by the Government of India in 1907 with the object of protecting higher edu-
cation in India from this danger, were communicated to His Highuesri's Government
by the Resident, and all the educational authorities in the State have been instructed
to bear them in mind, and act up to the spirit of the same.
6. The Police of the State have instructions to be vigilant, and to bring promptly to
notice all matters relating to seditious movements The machinery for obtaining infor-
mation has recently been reorganised. And with a view to arm the Police with ra<»re
effective powers for the purpose of prevention* an amendment of the Police Act ia novr
under consideration.
BARODA : ) ROMESH DUTT,
The 31st October 1909. Uei^an.
(19) From His Highness the Maharaja Scindia of Gwalior, dated the 3rd
December 1909,
After compliments. — I have been much honoured and gratified by
receiving Your Excellency's gracious letter of 6th August appreciating my
action in the matter of sedition, and I am grateful for the confidence
reposed in me by asking for my advice as to the best way of keeping
sedition out of Native {States generally.
HTS HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA SCINDIA OF GWALIOB. 161
2, The question is undoubtedly a grave one, affecting as it does the
future well-being of India. Therefore I feel it particularly behoves those
who preside over the destinies of people and have large personal stakes, to
do all in their power, to grapple with it vigorously till they have Bolved it
satisfactorily.
3, The gravity of the question is only equalled, if not surpassed, by its
delicacy, at least in the aspect in which Your Excellency has asked me to
approach it.
4, I shall try to give my opinion frankly according to my lights and
experience.
5, Whatever proportions sedition may have assumed in the country at
large, including the Native States, I make no doubt that the personal loyalty
of the Rulers of Native States to the British Throne remains and will
always remain unshaken and above suspicion and also that they all desire
peace, contentment and prosperity to reign in the land. And their loyalty
is only natural, as they cannot but realise that the permanent paramountcy
of the British Government is an indispensable condition of their own
existence and prosperity,
6, These sentiments of Native Chiefs cannot but be reflected in their
administrations and cannot fail to permeate to the humblest of their
subjects by a natural process, I cannot therefore help thinking that in
Native States at any rate, the number of people entertaining questionable
feelings towards the British Government must be infinitesimal, and such
feelings wherever they exist must be entirely the product of extraneous
influences.
7, The problem, therefore, is : —
(1) How to prevent the importation into the Natives States of ideal
and feelings not in accord with their traditions, and
(2) The eradication of those ideas and the punishment of persona
guilty of holding them, if they have found their way in
unnoticed,
8, A suitable amendment or extension of the Criminal Law bearing on
eeditious movements should be introduced wherever necessary.
9, Even more effective than the above, would be the formation of
" Vigilance Committees " composed of leaders of different communities
who are also men of staunch convictions and are earnest supporters of law
and order. These I now propose forming in my own State and ranging them
on the side of the Durbar for the purpose of inculcating in all, by precept
and example, a sense of the futility and wickedness of brewing disorder and
anarchy and the wisdom of pursuing healthy avocations and profitable
callings. These committees might also usefully serve as mediums for
bringing to the notice of the Durbar, cases which may baffle their own
private efforts,
10, Along with this, special care should be taken to see that the best
possible influences are brought to bear upon the students of schools and
colleges, and that all engaged in the profession of teaching take every
possible opportunity of instilling correct notions into the minds of their
pupils,
If) 2 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF BIKANER.
1 1 . These steps supplemented by a public avowal of the convictions
and policy of the Rulers, on the subject of sedition, whether in the form of
messages to their subjects or any other form, couched in unmistakable terms
should go a long way towards keeping the people aloof from any proceeding
designed to embarrass or weaken the authority of the British Government.
As an instance of the salufary effect of such an appeal or proclamation,
I may cite the action taken by me at the last Singhastha Fair in Ujjain
which had brought together some 6 lakhs of people of all grades and shades
of opinion from all parts of the country,
12 The last point I would touch upon is the importation of seditious
literature into the Native States. In regard to that, the Native States are
practically helpless as the evil has to be checked at its source and this can
only be done by the Government.
13. To show what measures I have adopted and how the foregoing
suggestions could be given effect to, I beg to forward, for Your Excellency's
perusal, copies of certain papers one of which has, I believe, been already
brought to Your Excellency's notice.
(20) From His Highness the Maharaja of Bikaner, dated
December 1909,
After compliments. — I beg to gratefully acknowledge receipt of Your
Excellency's kind Kharita of the 6th August 1909, and to tender my sincere
apologies for the great delay in replying to the same, which I greatly regret
and which has been clue to a combination of circumstances and chiefly to
domestic anxieties and trouble, which, as Your Excellency is aware,
culminated in the lamentable death of my mother, and for the same reasons
I beg that Your Excellency will be kind enough to forgive me.
Your Excellency's consulting the Ruling Princes and Chiefs of India on
such a snbject has, 1 feel sure, not only honoured and gratified them, but
has also, I would venture to add, given another proof — not that one was
wanted — of the sincere friendship which Your Excellency evinces for, and
the genuine interest Your Excellency takes in, the Protected States of India
and their Eulers, and of Your Excellency's solicitude that as "Pillars of the
Empire" they should take their proper place and share the responsibilities
and anxieties of the Supreme Government; and it is my humble belief that
such steps are bound to result in good both to the Imperial Government
and to the States themselves.
I am sure that no one can but realise that the movement of the party of
sedition is, as Your Excellency remarks, directed not only against the British
Government but against all constituted forms of government and the estab-
lisheo^ order of society and that the matter is one in which the interests of the
Paramount power and the Ruling Princes of India are identical, and I think
it can confidently be expected that Your Excellency will find — and no doubt
has already found — that the Ruling Chiefs of India will, as in the past, vigor-
ously rank themselves on the side of the Government which is also that of law
aiad order. Already several instances are forthcoming of the staunch loyalty
of the Chiefs and of their stepping loith in no hesitating manner and doing
their utmost to co-operate with the Government, where serlitionists have been
tried and brought to book or substantial measures and precautions have been
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF BIKANER. 163
taken to prevent their States and subjects from getting infected by this
most objectionable movement.
And there is every reason why this should be so — from whichever point of
view the matter may be looked at. I would beg Your Excellency to believe
that apart from interests being identical, there is a marked degree of true loy-
alty and genuine devotion towards their Sovereign on the part of the Chiefs
and that that is very real in spite of the scepticism of certain ill-informed and
ignorant persons who affirm it to be based on mere selfish motives and worldly-
considerations. Our Hindu religion — and no doubt the Muhammadan
religion as well — teaches us this; indeed it is one of its first principles, and
history bears testimony to my assertion even as regards the past and under
Sovereigns and Governments that contrast strangely and very differently to
our present King-Emperor and His Majesty's Government out here. Mo-
tives of self-preservation also, looking at it from the wordly point of view
necessitate our energetic co-operation with the Government in this direc-
tion and we are also bound by our Treaties to do so.
It is difficult to suggest for British India anything more than what hag
already been, and is being, done to stamp out or check the spread of this curse
where —if I may be permitted to say so— all sensible persons and those who
have a stake in the country have watched with genuine admiration and lively
gratification the far-seeing and statesmanlike policy adopted by Your Excel-
lency by which while firmly and with a strong hand suppressing anarchy and
sedition — which was so necessary — Your Excellency nevertheless declined to
bring in such repressive measure as might punish and bear harshly on the
innocent and loyal millions of India and I would further venture to join in
voicing the expressions of the general opinion of such persons that any other
method of coping with the critical situation through which we have just pass-
ed any show of weakness on the part of the Government, any undue or harsh
repressive or coercive measures— so suicidally advocated by those who
ill-judged the present times and who failed to realise the real gravity of
the consequences of the policy they advocated — anything likely to have
been interpreted as a breach of faith on the part of the Government of
India, or any deviation from the right and honourable path of duty in
satisfying the legitimate aspirations of the peoples of India— to which end
the Government of India had themselves, in their self-imposed task of
humanity, trained them and which end appears to have been well served
by the introduction of the recent reforms— any such measures might
easily have ended in the most serious results and consequences affecting
not only India but the Empire as a whole — a situation, the dealing with
which would not have been in the hands of the ill-advised and irresponsi-
ble persons who advocated a different policy, but which would have landed
the Government of India and His Majesty's Government in England into
an extremely difficult and awkward position. In short, so long as the
Government of India adhere to the present policy of dealing firmly and
promptly with all seditionists and' seditious movements, and at the same
time tempering it with kindness and parental solicitude for the loyalists
and the innocent, and even magnanimously showing mercy in deservin^
cases, there ought to be and can be no cause for any anxiety in any way,
even though as Your Excellency remarked in a recent speech there are
still rocks and shoals ahead.
The only other step that seems to be called for at the present roomonfc
is some measure to put a muzzle on that portion of the venomous press in
164 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHABAJA OF
India which does so mnch harm and which is to a great extent responsible
for all the serious unrest and violent crimes in India.
As far the Protected States, apart from what has already been done
by many States and what doubtless is being, and will be, done by the
remaining in the way of practical measures, a few suggestions occur to me
which, with great diffidence, I beg to offer to Your Excellency for what they
may be worth, and before doing so, the remark on my part seems hardly
to be called for to the effect that any matters connected with the States
and their Kulers must, of necessity, have a personal bearing for myself al^,
but I hope Your Excellency will believe that it is for no unworthy selfish
motives — though self-interest naturally with all human beings must always
be a consideration — that 1 propose bringing them forward here, but I do so
because I feel that it is my duty, in accordance with one of my essential
principles of respectfully yet clearly and frankly putting forward my views
and suggestions and I honestly believe that, in the event of thesa
proposals being seriously and, as I hope, favourably considered by Your
Excellency, they cannot but result in substantial advantage to all concerned
and will go a long way towards bringing about a better state of affairs.
1. It is the universal experience of every one who has had anything
to do with our States that no person, whether an official, or a noble, or a
private gentleman, can render any signal or real useful services to the
State or its Ruler or come to wield any beneficial influence of any impor-
tance unless his prestige and position is placed on a high pedestal so to
speak and this is greatly influenced according to the consideration and sup-
port given to him by the Ruler of the State and his Durbar. I believe I
am not going against the general consensus of opinion entitled to any
weight when I say that as in the past as well as in recent times, so in the
future also, in all times of stress and storm, the Ruling Princes and Chiefs
are destined to play a prominent and honourable part in the history of the
British Empire in India. It is true that loud protestations of loyalty
shouted from house tops are of no value — perhaps this has been too much
overdone already by certain interested communities to permit of much
reliance being placed on them — but Your Excellency will be the first to
realize that the loyalty of my community— the Ruling Chiefs — which has
stood the severe tests of the Mutiny and all these years is not a hollow
sham but something that is genuine and real and, should the time come
again, it can confidently be asserted that we can be depended upon and
we shall give further proofs by deeds and not by words alone. In ordinary
times or those intermediate periods like the present, we have it in our power,
and we consider it a privilege, to render in our own States our dutiful help
to the Government of His Majesty the King Emperor in India. But I have
often felt that we might make ourselves further useful, did circumstances
permit, or were we placed in the position, of being able to render some
services in British India also. One often notices cries in the papers and
eliewherc for influential and responsible people coming forward and doing
something more than mere talking in support of the Government and
denouncing disloyal movements and seditiouiats and, if my memory serves
me right, some feeble attempts have, at times, been made, since the
disturbing element made itself visible above the surface in India, to
constitute Societies and Bodies of Ruling Chiefs and Territorial Magnates,
&c,, to co-operate with Government and by tours, speeches, &c., to remove
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF BEKANER.
the misrepresentations deliberately spread about the Government and to
disillusion the people from the deception practised by, and to expose the
base motives and real character of, the agitators and seditionists, Bufe
after the first announcement, one never hears anything more about such
leagues and societies ; and the good they could have done, or are doing,
must, it is feared, be very limited indeed. Thanks to the education and
training imparted to our younger generation of Chiefs we are beginning
to look beyond our hitherto limited spheres and take due and real mterest
in the affairs of the Empire, and some of us will no doubt be found who
would desire to take a more active — personal as apart from official — part
in the attempt to co-operate with Government and like the big men in
England who — not necessarily forming part of the Government — discharge
their public duties, would also like to see whether we could not do
something useful by going about British India addressing audiences,
speaking to people, etc.. and by all other practical means attempt to destroy
the seeds of poison sown by seditionists and agitators and to counteract
their baneful influence. In short, instead of our merely acting, as hitherto
on the defensive we would now like to embark on an offensive campaign.
Whether any success would attend this, no one can really say till the
experiment has actually been tried.
But as in the Protected States, so in British India — and perhaps even
more so in these democratic days of socialistic tendencies — no one could
wield any wholesome influence unless he is looked upon as a person of
importance and command the respect due to his position and beiitting
his rank. Although — I believe I am right in saying — it is a fact thai
the majority of the people in British India are, on the whole, favourably
disposed and sympathetically inclined towards us, it is perhaps only to be
expected that the significant minority of the disloyalists and agitators —
who do not love my community — do all in their power to belittle our
worth and importance and attempt to set popular feeling against us, by
hook or by crook, and to hold us up to ridicule. The correctness of this
assertion would, I venture to say be corroborated by the storm and outcry
that is invariably raised and all the things that are said about, as well as
the epithets that are applied to us, in certain newspapers whenever any
one of my community writes or does anything in support of the Govern-
ment or against the propaganda of agitation, sedition and disloyalty.
I have no hesitation in saying that all the Chiefs gratefully realize that
under the segis of Your Excellency's rule, a very great deal has already
been done to help them and their Durbars, and to smooth over difficulties
and matters of a nature which caused them inconvenience and anxiety.
But in spite of that perhaps my community are too sensitive and perhaps
we are wrong, yet, whatever it may be, the fact remains that the feeling
is that, for diverse reasons of several years' standing which it would ba
as unnecessary as it is out of place to touch upon here, our dignity and
importance has gradually diminished to some extent and that we do not
now occupy the same position as we did some 40 to 50 years ago and we
consequently feel that this fact, to a very large extent, destracts from our
usefulness and lessens our influence and power of doing good and of our
contributing our modest quota of help to the British Government in
maintaining law and order and checking lawlessness and violence.
1 firmly believe that all the Chiefs will join in the expression of the
earnest hope — and doubtless the kind consideration, sympathy and regard
166 SIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF BIKANER,
Tour Excellency has already shown, as at the Agra Durbar in 1907, will
encourage and embolden them to so hope— -that, in spite of the heavy
work entailed on Your Excellency consequent on the introduction of the
reforms, not to speak of the very responsible duties of wielding the
destinies of the Indian Empire with which you are at all times occupied,
Your Excellency will be able to find time in the, alas !, very short period
remaining of your term of Vriceroyalty to look into the matter, and to, at
least, lay the foundations in concrete 6f restoring the Izzat and position
of the Chiefs to their former standard,
II. The second 4)oint which I would respectfully bring forward for
Your Excellency's favourable consideration is that according to present
arrangements any person taking part even in the most violent or the most
seditious movements against our States or their Killers has only to go
across into British India to enjoy perfect immunity and I am sure Your
Excellency's Government would be still further putting the Chiefs and
their Durbars under a debt of gratitude by the early consideration of the
point as to whether or not such persons should be allowed to escape
unpunished. Apart from the ordinary yet important considerations of the
fact that any one hostile to any properly constituted government and one
who is an enemy of all that counts for law and order should nowhere be
able tqjiiid shelter, there would perhaps not be any two opinions about it
that just as ,is the case that all such movements affecting the British
Government and British India have both direct and indirect consequences
for the Protected States, so exactly — though to a correspondingly smaller
extent according to the lesser degree of our importance— such offences
against the States and their Rulers must necessarily as a matter of course
affect the British Government and British India also ; and further a study
of similar anarchical and nihilistic movements in other parts of the world
leaves one little doubt for apprehending that the cult of the bomb at
present directed mainly against; officers of the Governmenf of India in
British India is bound in time to be directed against the Ruler of States
as well as their own officers and looking ahead and keeping this in view,
it seems to be most important arid all the more urgently necessary that
all persons guilty of sedition or any violent attempts against the States
and their Rulers, of writing or publishing seditious articles, pamphlets, &c.,
or otherwise disseminating sedition in and against Native States and their
Rulers should be liable to extradition and that they should not receive
shelter in British India—whether such offences were committed in British
India or the territories of the Protected States and may I be forgiven for
respectfully pointing out that this would also be in conformity with the
Treaties between the British Government and the majority of the States
where the stipulation is put down in the very first Article that " the friends
and enemies of one party shall be the friends and enemies of both parties".
At present such offences are not included in the Extradition Treaties
and even if extradition could not be arranged or sanctioned by Govern-
ment it would seem to be desirable that at least the offenders should be
duly dealt with in British India by the British Government. At any rate
it could do nothing but good if either of these two alternatives were
followed — preferably the former — and if it became widely known that no
offenders and persons guilty of such serious offences would, any further,
enjoy immunity either in British India or in the Native States no'
matter whether auch ufiVaces were committed against the Government or
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF BIKA.NER. 167
the States and their Rulers \ and possibly some such concerted action,
leaving little loophole for mischief-making against either party, might
tend to the earlier stamping out of anarchism and disloyalty.
Ill It is extremely advisable that there should be unity of action as
regards the exchange and circulation of information concerning suspicious
characters as Your Excellency has suggested. Indeed this is a point
that I h ul already taken up on my own account in April last. What
appears to me to be urgently called for is that we should be in possession,
at the earliest possible opportunity, of the particulars of all the move-
ments and actions of not only seditious persons but societies, and
specially the dangerous ones. If possible, it would be a very great
facility if some measures were taken to enable us to be put in possession
of i.ll the facts, as soon as they are known at the Criminal Intelligence
Bureau, through the Political authorities if time permits, or even direct,
in cases of urgency — copies of such information being in due course
sent to the local Political authorities also for their information. Besides
British India, we are also ordinarily in complete ignorance of what is
going on in our sister or even neighbouring States until we hear some time
later from friends or see the announcement in the papers of discoveries
or arrests of trials.
Although a somewhat different subject, yet another matter has a close
resemblance with the above. Owing to there being, so far as Tarn aware, no
Press Cuttings Agency in India, it is difficult for us to come to know what
is being said or written about us in different parts of India in the various
English and Vernacular newspapers and in many cases, and for obvious
reasons, it is often very desirable that Chiefs and their Durbars should
be fully posted about such comments, criticisms or attacks. Owing also to
the diversity of languages and other difficulties it is practically impossible
for them to collect or get hold of all such articles. &c,, • or their translations.
The knowledge of the criticisms and comments directed against the Govern-
ment of India — many of which we know to be vilely unfair — would also be
of advantage to us and possibly of some use to Government also, when
as in some cases, we might be able to refute the same should it be within
our power to do so and at the same time it would keep us acquainted with
the state of the political atmosphere in British India,
As for what we have done in our State, Your Excellency is aware that
we were the first State to pass an Explosive Substances Act in July J 908 and
many months ago we issued confidential instructions to all local and district
authorities. An Act forbidding the importation into, or the possession in,
the State, of dangerous, seditious or disloyal papers including all such
pamphlets, &c., is also about to be taken up and I have further under my
consideration the question of stopping some of the really notorious and
dangerous seditious and disloyal newspapers published in India from being-
brought or sent into my State. I am inclined to the view, in regard to the
latter, that it is prudent to move cautiously in this matter and to
exercise due discrimination between such papers and those which,
though n )t of an altogether desirable tone are not the active organs of
sedition and the prohibition of which might do more harm than good by
magnifying their importance and creating suspicion where none may
exist or otherwise producing prejudicial effects, and I have already taken
steps in this direction and obtained particulars of such papers through the
Political Agent, Bikaner,
168 HIS HIGHNfeSS THE NAwAfc OP RAMPUR,
I am happy to add for Your Excellency's information that, so far at any
rate, my State and people are free fromi all infection of a seditious or disloyal
nature against the British Government and, although prophecies are
dangerous, I have every hope that they will remain strictly loyal to the end.
For the future, I hope no assurances are necessary from me to the effect
that I and my Durbar will ever do all in our power to co-operate with the
Government and that, as in the past, we shall, as occasion demands,
ceaselessly and vigilantly continue to take all such measures and precautions
as may appear best suited to cope with the situation with due regard to
local conditions,
Of the staunch loyalty of my House and our unstinted devotion to the
person of His Majesty the King-Emperor, I need say nothing. It is proved
by actual deeds in past history ; it is a matter of great pride and pleasure
to us that my ancestor Maharaja Sirdar Singhji was the only Chief in
Kajputana to personally march from Bikaner at the head of his troops
to render assistance to the British Government in the dark days of the
Mutiny and I consider it a privilege and my great good fortune to have
personally rendered services to my Sovereign on active service, and I would
beg Your Excellency to always rely on and count upon us in all future
emergencies.
In conclusion, I would again express the hope that Your Excellency will
forgive my having taken up so much of your time, and with all good
wishes, &c.
(21) From — His Highness the Nawab of Rampur, dated the 12th Sep-
tember 1909.
To — His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor of the United Provinces of
Agra and Oudh.
After compliments, — I write to thank Your Honour for your kind letter
of the 7th September from which I am very sorry to learn that the party
of sedition and violence, so far from abandoning their seditious propaganda
in British India, are trying to extend their baneful activities to Native
States. Your Honour may rest assured that any assistance that I can give
either in person or in any other way, will be freely and ungrudgingly given,
because the traditional relations of this State with the British Government
are those of the closest friendship and strictest loyalty, and the Treaties which
have existed between the Government of His Most Gracious Majesty the
King-Emperor and my House for so long bind me to that Government by ties
of the deepest obligation and sincerest devotion. In this connection I may
perhaps be permitted to recall the part my great-grandfather played in the
troublous days of 1857 when he spared neither himself nor his subjects nor
money in the cause of the British Government and in protecting
Europeans.
While entirely agreeing with Your Honour that anarchism is a common
enemy of the Paramount Power and the Indian Princes and also a menace
to the established order 'of society I feel bound to say that apart from
the fact that the danger is a common one I should ever deem it a privilege
to place myself with all my resources at the disposal of the British
Government,
HIS HI&mfESS THE ftAJA OF TEHRI. 169
I am happy to say that this State has so far been free from the
influence of seditionists, who would find it most difficult to get a foothold
in Rampur, but if any attempt is made to seduce my subjects from their
loyalty we shall be prepared to deal with the evil promptly,
1 have carefulfy considered the subject matter of Your Honour's letter
and have embodied my ideas with regard to it, in rough outline, in a
memorandum enclosed herein, I should be glad to obtain the benefit of
Your Honour's views on the points raised in the memorandum and to
modify or add to them in a way agreeable to your wishes so as to give
complete effect to the the part of co-operation in stamping out anarchy and
sedition to which Your Honour has referred in the letter under reply.
In conclusion, I am very glad to find that my letter of July 1908 has
not been forgotten and that Your Honour has taken the earliest opportunity
to give effect to the request contained in it. This I regard as a token of
confidence on the part of the British Government of which I am justly
proud and for which pray accept my sincerest thanks.
(22) From— His Highness the Raja of Tehri, dated the 20th September
1908,
To — His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor of the United Provinces of
Agra and Oudh,
After compliments, — Your"Honour's note was delivered to me in due
course. No doubt the subject upon which Your Honour has been pleased
to address me is a very important one, and I have given it due con-
sideration. Fortunately in my State the propaganda of the anarchists may
be said to be a thing unknown, nor is there any possibility of its ever
taking roots in a soil so uncongenial to it as that of Tehri where loyalty to
the throne has always been regarded as a part of religion, The proverb
says *' Qui se resemble's assemble." My people differ from the seditionists
in their ideals, education, customs and manners that it becomes practically
an impossibility for them to coalesce with each other, Nevertheless I quite
agree that the time has come when some sort of measures should be taken,
by the way of precaution, to remove any -possibility of temptation being
offered to the younger generation,
For the present I believe steps be taken first to prevent the circulation
of seditious literature : secondly, to keep the State free from the seditionists.
Should Your Honour be pleased to approve of the proposals I would
suggest that the Post Office be required to keep the civil authorities
informed of all the newspapers that come for circulation, and to withhold
the delivery of those that may savour of sedition, I am of opinion that no
discrimination ought to be made between^ sedition under veil preached by
indirect insinuations and sedition openly asserted, as sedition in any garb
will always do the same mischief. Probably it may never become necessary
to put in force the latter measure, as the majority of the educated people
here are in the* State service and we can use our influence to discourage
seditious literature being read by them, without resorting to the other
means, but I should like the Post Office to have such powers to deal (with)
exceptional eases. I would require the police in British territory to keep
us confidentially informed of the movements of any sedifaonist who may
170 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF ALWAR'.
enter or wish to enter our territory. Directions frill be issoied'to our police'
to remain alert, but the information that may be received from outside
will always ba valuable. If a susrjected seditionist enters our territory I
would have him kept under surveillance, and if the suspicion against him
be justified, I would have him turned out of the State. If however during
his stay in our territory, he committed anything which, if committed m
British territory, would be regarded as an offence under the laws in force, I
would have him tried and punished in the same wa/ as if he were in British
territory. A close watch would also be kept on' persons with tendencies
towards anarchism, no matter whether they be outsiders or the residents
of the State. With such measures which I have briefly described above, I
think, we can keep sedition out of my territory. If, however, Your Honour
may consider it necessary to frame seveTeT measures, I shall indeed be*
glad to carry them out.
With kindest regards, &c,
Extracts from speeches of Riding Chiefs during the recent (1909) tour of
His Excellency Lord Hinto in Native States.
1. Extract from the speech of His Highness the Maharaja of Alwar at
the State banquet on the 26th Oct.
2, Extract from the speech of His Highness the Maharaja of Jaipur at
the State banquet on the 29th Oct. 1909.
3, Extract from the speech of His Highness the Maharana of Udaipur
(Mewar) at the State banquet on the 3rd Nov. 1909,
4. Extract from the speech of His Highness the Maharaja Scindia*
of Gwalior at the State banquet on the 6th Nov. 1909.
5, Extract from the speech of Her Highness the Begum of Bhopal at
the State banquet on the llth Nov, 1909,
6. Extract from the speech of His Highness the Maharaja of Baroda at
the State banquet on the 15th Nov. 1909.
7. Extract from the speech of His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore at
the State banquet on the 25th Nov. 1 909,
1. Extract from the speech of His Highness the Maharaja of Alwar at
the State banquet on the %6ih October 1909.
Your Excellencies,— Allow me to greet you with a cordial welcome to
the capital of my State on your first entrance into Rajputana during your
Official tour in our province ; and we take delight in welcoming5 Your
Excellency not only as the representative of His Most August Majesty the
Emperor of India, whom we have been accustomed to regard with feelings
of loyalty and esteem, but we welcome you also personally as the champion
of the cause of India of the future*
We greet you as one whose sympathy add devotion for India's interests
have, I think, been demonstrated in practical form, and Whose respect and
regard for the privileges and enhancement of the prosperity of the Indian
States has, I am certain, been silently but surely valued and much appreciated
by those concerned.
HtS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF ALWAK. 171
We were hoping Your Excellency would have been able to pay us a
longer visit last March, but the Indian reforms which were then under
the consideration of Government presumably necessitated the cancelling
of your proposed visit, which was a source of much disappointment to us all.
However, we are entertaining you now with no less assurances of sincere
pleasure, and during this interval the reforms also have taken a more
practical shape, thus enabling those who are interested in them to study
the situation which is calculated to further the progress and prosperity of
this country.
India is now going through a state of transformation, and its deep
slumber has been awakened by the light of education and travel, and
partly by the radical march of events in the East.
Now has come the time when India, once the greatest of civilised
nations, is going to attempt to rebuild some of its portions that have
tumbled into decay, and when, if it is to eventually claim its position once
more alongside those nations who are now on their heights, it must need
help and guidance in order to ensure its steady and certain progress.
This task of guidance has been ordained by Providence to be placed in
the hands of the British nation, whose King to-day rules the mighty
dominions over which the sun never sets.
Surely no task has ever fallen upon a nation or a king in history which
is greater or grander in its aspect— no task of which a nation could be
more rightly proud.
All this experience of many centuries which has taken so long to weld
together this great Empire is now being utilised for the benefit of this
great continent of India, and it is left to the civilisation of this country
to take advantage of this opportunity or to lose it, for the purpose of
rebuilding itself under such just and sympathetic rule.
Since the time of the great wars of the Mahabharat the old and
refined civilisation of poor India had been losing its foothold which was so
strongly based on its religion of elevating and life-giving principles and
the internal disorders and foreign invasions since had scattered its unity
until it was on the verge of degradation and decay.
It was at such a time when the destinies of the country were at their
lowest ebb that its future fate was placed in the hands of the British
people.
What India would have otherwise been to-day seems almost difficult to
even imagine, but it is no flattery to state that what we see of India
today is the result of the tutorship of its new and welcome guardian.
I think right-minded and self-respecting Indians need not be ashamed
of such a record of guardianship — indeed they can take this opportunity
of helping and not hindering the cause of the rulers of this country ;
helping the rulers to raise India to the level of the other great nations of
the world in points of civilisation and otherwise.
Your Excellency has now been at the helm controlling the affairs of
this vast Empire for four years, and during this time we have been much
interested in studying the various reforms which you have initiated with
the intention of accelerating the progress of this country.
172 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA 6F ALWAR.
We have admired the sympathy and courage with which you had
persisted in the face of storms and obstacles to embark on schemes intend-
ed to help the people of India, and our hearts have gone out to our great
and popular statesman, the present Secretary of State for India, in his
resolute determination to introduce schemes for the benefit of India in the
face of dark clouds appearing on its horizon.
But while we thus appreciate your kindness and firmness in extending
your helping hand to those who are in need, we are also in complete
accord with you in your courage and firmness to suppress with your
other hand the recent crimes against the law and the acts of miscreants
calculated to retard the harmonious and peaceful progress of the country.
We feel glad, however, to think that in most cases they have only
been the acts of a few fanatics who have not only deservedly received
their due punishment, but have also aroused expressions of strong
disapproval from their own countrymen.
The future of India must depend a great deal on the hands that are
shaping its destiny, but it must also depend in no small degree on the
people themselves.
Education will, I think, play a large part in its future progress, and
it is on how the people digest it and apply it to the problems of life that
it will depend how rapid that progress will be.
The problem of the future of India is ono which I am sure haunts the
minds of many people, and I cannot claim myself to be an exception to
the rule, for I think with the question of the future of India also depends
the question of the future of Native States with which I am more direct-
ly concerned.
The two are so closely connected to each other, and the one question
is so dependent on the other that I think they are inseparable.
But so long as the education that is given to the children of this
country is based on life-giving and man-making principles and the
hands that are shaping its destiny are as just, gentle and sympathetic as
they have been, specially so during Your Excellency's term of office, I
don't think the well-wishers of this great Indian Empire need be over-
anxious about its peaceful and brilliant future.
I always take delight in ascribing the notions of loyal attachment to
the throne and the love of peace and subordination to law among the
great masses of the Hindus to the teachings they have received through
the old schools or through their own societies regarding those noble
principles of our religion.
I am personally of doubt; though I am open to correction, if the pure-
ly technical or literary or even degree-taking education can raise that
firm foundation of character so essential for the well-being of a race.
I have no doubt that this important subject has already engaged
Your Excellency'.s kind attention, and I would dearly like to see the day
when a greater share of moral and religious education was introduced
into at least our lower standard schools.
HIS HIGHNESS THT MAHRAJA OF JAIPUR, 173
Hlfc> HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF UDAIPUR.
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA SCINDIA OF QWALIOR.
$ Extract from the speech of His Highness the Maharaja of Jaipur at the
State banquet on the 29th October 1909.
" When Your Excellency came to India the political atmosphere was
surcharged with elements of discontent and unrest, feelings new and alien
to the country. In some parts there was a sense of dissatisfaction on account
of the supposed flouting of aspiration on the part of Government. This
created in inexperienced minds, overwrought by seditious teachings, violent
feeling, which found expression in crimes and outrages hitberto unknown
in the land. The misdeeds of these perverted youths startled all right-
thinking men and produced a feeling of abhorrence and righteous indigna-
tion all over the country showing thereby in an unmistakable manner how
deep-seated was the faith of the people at large in the moderation, justice
and impartiality of the British Government, Your Excellency at this junc-
ture, undeterred by adverse criticism, adopted a line of action which has,
I think, given general satisfaction, and I trust I may be allowed to express
my warmest admiration of Your Excellency's attitude throughout, of your
firm determination to suppress sedition combined with a kindly sympathy
for the just and legitimate aspirations of all true and loyal subjects,"
His Highness dwelt on the unfortunate neglect of religious instruction in
the educational system of the country, but felt confident that His Excel-
lency's wise policy would steer the vessel of State safely across the shoals,
and bring all back once more to the sate anchorage that they had enjoyed
under British rule. The Maharaja touched lightly on his own public acts
in regard to sedition and assured the Viceroy that the British Government
would always have the most loyal and unhesitating co-operation from the
Jaipur State, and also, he had not the least doubt, from his brother Chiefs
in India.
#. Extract from the speech of his Highness the Maharana of Udaipur
(Mewar) at the State banquet on the 3rd November 1909.
Your Excellency has been confronted in India with many troubles and
anxieties. Certain evil-disposed persons, using as their weapons the ignorant
among the people, have endeavoured to ferment sedition against the
British Government, and they have committed some dastardly acts which
have recoiled to their own detriment upon the heads of the very persons
•who committed them.
The policy and measures adopted by Your Excellency for stopping
those crimes are sweeping away from the skies of India the black clouds
which have obscured them. I am confident that these evil deeds and
intentions which are not very widespread will not be able to bear fruit
over the whole of India, and that they will never be able to spread in the
Indian States. It gives me pleasure to be able to assure Your Excellency
that in my State, at all events, such things will never be permitted to exist.
4. Extract from the speech of His Highness the Maharaja Scindia of
Gwatior at the State banquet on the 6th November 1909.
* * #• * * # *
There is, however, one matter to which I must allude. I have watched
with respectful admiration, the firm and enlightened views by which Your
174 HER fflGHttESS THi; BEGUM OF BHOPAL.
Excellency and Lord Morley have been guided in dealing with the great
question of how to meet the legitimate aspirations of His Majesty's Indian
subjects. I rejoice that the folly of an insignificant minority has not for a
moment deterred Your Excellency from advancing boldly but cautiously
on the path of reform. This is worthy of a nation that has ever displayed
an unselfish resolve to do justice throughout the va^t dominions which the
wisdom of God has placed under the care of the British Empire.
I believe that an overwhelming majority of those who are entitled to
some voice in Imperial concerns — including the great body of the Native
Chiefs and those who have a real stake in the country — are perfectly
content to await with confidence the mo is u res which a benign Govern-
ment may from time to time see fit to introduce.
* * * -x- * * *
6. Extract from thi spseeh of Her Highness the Begum of Bhopal at the
State banquet on the llth November 1909.
*»##•**#
3. Your Excellency, I thank God that the loyalty of tny family is fully
reflected in the hearts of my subjects ; indeed it is difficult for us, who live
in Bhopal, to realise that such a thing as disloyalty exists. England has
won her way to greatness, not by the force of arms, but by her moral
strength, and it is this moral strength which compels the admiration and
fealty of every rightminded person. It was, indeed, well for India that she
came under control of such a Power : a control which has given to her people
the inestimable gifts of peace, justice and liberty, and which has led to a
period of prosperity and progress the like of which has never before been
dreamt of. It is beyond dispute that the vast majority of His Majesty's
Indian subjects, and especially the M.uhammedan section of them, gratefully
acknowledge the manifold blessing-* that have accrued to them under
British rule, the permanency of which they regard as the only guarantee of
their welfare. The disloyalty of the few only serves to emphasise the loyalty
of the many. As I have already said, we in Bhopal have little acquaintance
with this minority ; for my own part, those who compose it remind me of
nothing so much as of Sadi's bat, who, happening to open his eyes in the
daylight, and finding he could not see, straightway fell to abusing the sun.
4. Your Excellency, I as a Muhammadan, can say without any fear o*
contradiction that the love, loyalty, and faithfulnass which the Muhammadans
bear to the British Government, is not due to any transitory and world
policy, but it is based upon the teaching of their aacred book, which says—
" Indeed thou wil'st find the nearest friends of the believers among those
who call themselves Christians, because they have priests and monks and
they are not proud."
5. It is not I alone, but all the Indian Chiefs that unanimously agree
that Your Excellency's wise and broad policy has removed the darkness like
the Sun that illumines the World. Your Excellency has in fact saved
India from a great calamity like an experienced captain of a ship that saves
her during a storm. Such statesmanship, I may be permi tted to say, runs
in Your Excellency's family of which in India in general and Bhopal in
particular has had experience a hundred years ago.
6is fiicn&NttSS THE MAHARAJA OFBABUDI 175
6. Extract from the speech oj His Highness the Maharaja ofBaroda at the
State banquet on the 15th November 1909.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I rise now to propose the health of my illustrious
guest, His Excellency the Viceroy. Two of His Excellency's predecessors,
Lord Dufferin and Lord I^lgin, favoured us with their visits within my
time, and as on those occasions I rejoice once more in according a cordial
welcome to the august representative of the King-Emperor. Fears have
lapsed since the visits of the preceding Viceroys, many changes have-
taken place with the years, but the friendly relations of my State with the
British Government regain unchanged, and the firm and unalterable loyalty
of my house to the British Throne remains unshaken. Indeed the lapse
of years has drawn our mutual relations yet closer. We form portions of
the same great Empire. We are inspired by the same object, which is the
preservation of peace, and public tranquillity, and we are animated by the
same wish, which is the promotion of the progress, the prosperity and the
happiness of the people*
My Lord, it has always appeared to me that any true progress among the
people must embrace their social and moral advancement, as well as their
material well being. I think the true function of Government is not to stand
entirely aloof in these matters, but to keep pace with modern times and
modern ideas. After all the masses are yet sunk in appalling ignorance, and
they need our support, encouragement and help in effecting reforms* To
minister to social and moral advancement has always been the consideration
and one of the duties of the sovereign in the East. I have myself
sometimes been criticised for taking administrative action to correct
social evils and religious abuses. So far, however, as one can judge, from?
the results, my policy has met with some measure ot success. In these*
and in all other matters of internal administration every Native State, irr
proportion as it enjoys liberty of action, grows in efficiency in securing the1
welfare of its subjects, and, therefore, in promoting general progress any
curtailment of freedom in internal affairs lessens our sense of responsibility,
and weakens our power for effecting improvement. Loyalty has always been
considered in the East as one of the first virtues in a people, But
loyalty, when merely sentimental, is of small value, It should be real,
genuine and active. To secure such loyalty there should be a community
of interest between the subjects and the ruling power, The former should
have a proper share in the administration of the country and should feel
that the Government is their own. It is for this reason that I hail with
pleasure those great measures of reform which Your Excellency initiated
and which His Majesty's Government have accepted. These reforms will
open out to the people of India a larger field of activity, and inspire them
With a greater sense of responsibility in the performance of the civic
duties, and future generations will recognise in these statesman-like
measures a forward step in the progress and advancement of the com-
munity under the rule of England.
•jf * •# * * #
I know full well the difficulties with which education is beset, difficulties
which many are liable to ignore in their haste to achieve in a day those
results which are attainable only by the patient and selfless work of gene-
rations, I would have my people learn that progress, to be real, must have
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF MYSORE
its roots in themselves, that they must look to the orderly conduct of their
lives, that it is probity, fair-mindedness, public spirit and loyalty to the
State which make good citizens and that he who can subordinate his
private interests to the common weal is he who id fitted for a voice in
affairs of State. The truly educated wil] regard the personal liberty they
enjoy as the most precious blessing of civilization, and their duties to the
State as essential to their corporate existence.
Those, on the other hand, who confound liberty with license, and seek
to undermine authority, must be repressed with a firm hand, and not
allowed to endanger the public tranquillity or general progress. These,
my Lord, are my ideals of education and self-help. In all my endeavours
to achieve progress and to make my subjects worthy citizens, I know that
I can rely on Your Excellency's support. I cordially acknowledge the
ready assistance which my administration receives from Your Excellency's
Government, and as cordially I assure Your Excellency of my readiness to
respond, within my power, to any call for co-operation with the Govern-
ment of India.
I desire, in conclusion, to express on behalf of the Maharani and of
myself the gratification that we feel at Lady Minto's visit to our capital,
and I wish once more to offer to Her Ladyship and to Your Excellency
our heartiest welcome. Our welcome, my Lord, is fraught with the most
heartfelt gratitude that Providence has saved Your Excellency from the
dastardly attempt at outrage, of which the news has just reached us,
I voice, my Lord, the feelings not only of myself and of my people
but also of the whole of India, in expressing, so far as words can express,
our profound horror that such a crime could ever be thought of,
much less attempted against one who is not only the representative of
His Majesty, but also the truest friend and benefactor of our countiy.
7. Extract from the speech of His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore
at the State banquet on the 25th November 1909.
* * •* * * #•
On such an occasion it is only fitting that I should touch briefly on
public affairs which Your Excellency is directing with so firm and
sympathetic a hand. The four years which have elapsed since you came
to India have been years of strenuous work and grave anxiety and the
Government of India have had no light task in maintaining that law and
order which have always been the watchword of British Rule in India.
The struggle has been a severe and protracted one, but there is every
reason to hope that the tide has at last turned, and that — thanks
to the firmness and restraint of Your Excellency's Government to
their statesmanlike foresight in recommending and obtaining for
educated Indians a larger share of representation, without at the
same time relaxing their determination to suppress lawlessness — India
may look forward to an era of peace and contentment. Your
Excellency, the measures adopted by the Government of India to
maintain their authority have always had my sincere sympathy, and
I am, and always have been, ready to co-operate to the utmost of my
power in loyally supporting those measures Your Excellency needs no
HIS HIGHNESS THE RAJA OF DHAR. ""^ 177
assurance of my own loyalty to our beloved King Emperor, and as regards
my people I take this opportunity of publicly expressing my conviction
that they do not forget the intimate associations of the past and are
actuated by nothing but friendly feelings for the British race, and by
loyalty and gratitude to the Paramount Power, Happily, therefore, it
has not been necessary for my Government to adopt any repressive
measures except to arm ourselves, as :i matter of precaution, with powers
against seditious writings in the public press. Tiiese powers are, I firmly
believe, necessary, Their existence is in itself sufficient to keep in check
the evil against which they are aimed, and I trust it may never be
necessary to enforce them rigorously. But it is not only as a "strong and
sympathetic Ruler that Your Excellency's name will live in Indian
History. I feel that I may speak in the name of my brother Chiefs in
all India when I say that Your Excellency has established a peculiar and
special claim to our gratitude and affection by the sympathy and considera-
tion which you have shown both in word and deed in your policy towards
Native States. 1 can say from my heart that we Chiefs respond most
warmly to the generous and kindly sentiments which your Excellency
has so frequently and eloquently expressed towards us, and that we shall
ever cherish your memory as one of our truest friends and sympathisers.
I would also like to express on this occasion the deep horror and indio-na-
tion which has been aroused all over India, and which is no where
stronger than in Mysore, at the dastardly outrage recently attempted at
Ahmedabad. We all share the universal feeling of thankfulness that
your lives and persons were so mercifully protected.
Notification, dated the 5th March, 1910.
The following papers are published for general information in continua-
tion of Notification, dated the 22nd January, 1910, page — ante.
Letters to His Excellency Lord Minto from certain Ruling Chiefs,
1. Letter fr,pm His Highness the Raja of Dhar, dated the loth January
1910.
2. Letter from His Highness the Maharaja of Jaipur, dated the 6th
February, 1910.
3. Letter from His Highness the Maharaja of Alwar, dated the 6th
February, 1910.
From — His Highness the Raja of Dhar, to His Excellency the Viceroy
and Governor- General of India, dated the 15th January, 1910.
After Compliments — I am very much honoured by Your Excellency's
Kharita dated the 6th August, 1909, in respect to the concerting of
measures against our common enemy the seditious party, who under
various garbs have been disseminating seditious ideas in the minds of the
people not only against the British Administration but all constituted
authority and order of society in British India, and who are even trying
tc get a footing in some of the Native States in India as well. It is a
matter of deep regret to me that a Kharita containing a subject of such
178 HIS HIGHNESS THE BAJA OF DHAR.
vital moment involving the common interest of us all should have been
delayed so Jong owing to various unavoidable circumstances and now with
Your Excellency's permission I may be allowed to send the following
reply : —
I fully agree with Your Excellency in thinking that the time has come
when the Native Princes of India should no longer remain satisfied in
attempting to eradicate this dire disease from their own territories, but
should also co-operate with the Paramount Power in concerting measures
for the eradication of the disease altogether wherever it is found in
India, so that the territories they rule over should also be free from
import of germs of the same from outside.
In this connection the Native Chiefs in India have >a two-fold task
before them : —
(i) The prevention of any probable growth of such disease within
their States, and to keep them free from it, without unnecessarily
altering the internal arrangements.
(ii) The combating against the import of sedition from outside,
and thus prevent the propagation of the same amongst their
own subjects. .
To achieve the first end in a generally law-abiding people, who have
every reverence for their Ruler, is easier than the second, which, with the
spread of civilisation and easy means of communication of ideas to others,
is much more difficult,
Al though a few years ago some signs of sedition were visible in Dhar
generally amongst students, yet prompt and severe steps taken by the
Darbar not only enabled rne to put down the same in its very beginning
but made the condition such that any growth of the same would not be
congenial for the future.
In spite of the numerous difficulties that beset our path in the
performance of the task before us, I am glad to inform Your Excellency
that since then I have been able to keep my State iree Iroin the pest, by
adoption of the toll owing measures : —
(1) I have arranged to keep veiy strict and secret watch over my
people that they may not indulge in any seditious topics and thus prepare
a soil for the growth of the evil iii future.
(2) No public meeting to discuss political subjects is permitted to be
held within my territories ; and no public meeting of any kind can be held
without the permission of the Darbar, such permission being but rarely
given and then only for deserving objects. When such meetings are
held the proceedings are always watched by the State Police,
(3) There are only two printing presses in Dhar ; one of them belongs
to the State. Both of them usually print forms and circulars, etc., used
in the various States. Every precaution is taken by the Police that no
objectionable publication may emanate from them.
(4) As the seeds of sedition are generally and easily sown in the
young and unformed minds, my Darbar have taken especial care in their
education. Not only are objectionable teachings of every kind strictly
prohibited but as a further safeguard the Duibar, before the appointment
HIS HIGHNESS THE RAJA OF DHAR. 179
of teachers, causes careful enquiry into the antecedents of applicants, so
that no teacher with seditious or morbid ideas can be employed.
(5) All public institutions are prohibited from subscribing to objection-
able newspapers.
(6) A diary of every foreigner coming into the towns is kept by tko
State Police, and information of all suspected characters is given to the
proper authorities.
(7) Even Sadhus and Fakirs are not allowed to stop more than three
days in any particular town within the State. By making this a general
rule and by watching the movements of the new comers much mischief
; is avoided without unnecessarily exciting the indignation of, or wounding
the religious feelings of, people which are generally respected.
(8) Moreover information of all suspicious characters coming into the
State is beforehand given to us by the British Police through the Thagi
and Dakaiti Department for which my thanks are due, as by obtaining
such information in time my Darbar become forewarned and forearmed.
(9) Above all, to avoid the dangers which may likely arise in spite of
our care and vigilance from the hands of cowardly and unscrupulous
wretches, the Explosive Act has bgen passed.
Measures such as these for the prevention of any probable growth
of the evil in my State or import of the same from outside could only
be effected by loyal co-operation of my people with my Darbar and the
confidence of the political authorities in the action taken by us and timely
advice and help given by them, for which my special thanks are due,
that I have been able to combat against this evil, and my complete
success will rest on the detail and effective operation of these measures.
I am sure all my brother Chiefs have adopted similar measures,
suited to their own local conditions and people, yet to facilitate matters
more and for the quick adaptation of means to gain our common end I
may be allowed by Your Excellency to mention the following proposals: —
(i) That communication between the State police of different Native
States may be made more frequent and free than it is at present.
(ii) That as this is a cause in which all of us are equally concerned
mutual discussions might be allowed to ba held amongst the brother
Chiefs and the Political Officials at the seat of the Local Government
when they meet there to discuss other important questions concerning
their welfare.
(Hi) As civilization is spreading under the aegis of the British Raj, we
in the Native States are trying to keep pace with the times and our
attention turned more towards the education of the masses, thus making
our people to face a new danger — the danger of imbibing unhealthy ideas
through objectionable newspapers, whose unhealthy tone unless very
much improved will frustrate our efforts.
(iv) That the training to be given to the masses may be based on
religious principles and ideals and inculcation of good iDorals in the minds
of the younger generation should be insisted upon for the foundation of
their character, in order to make them loyal subjects and responsible
180 fllg HIGHNESS TIIK MAHVRAJA OF JAIPUR.
citizens. All public schools should be graded according to the number of
such men turned out rather than the high percentage of passed out
bread-winners.
tv) Lastly as the success of our undertaking depends on the
Co-operation of the people, they mu?t be impressed with the good
intention of any step we take in the matter and of our unalloyed
sympathy towards them ; and the persons entrusted to carry out these
measures should not only do their duty faithfully and loyally, but without)
unnecessarily creating that alarm in their minds which is a great obstacle
in the path of success.
In conclusion, my Lord, it will not be out of place to assure Your
Excellency that I with all the resources of my State and people will
ever be ready for any service that may be required of me by the Para-
mount Power, and I am ever ready to render any assistance to achieve
that end which is necessary for safeguarding our common interest.
From — His Highness the Maharaja of Jaipur, to His Excellency the
Viceroy and Governor- General of India, dated the 6th February 1910.
After compliments, — I beg to acknowledge the receipt of Your
Excellency's Kharita, dated 6th August, 1909, on the subject of concerted
action to check, the dissemination of seditious propaganda in different parts
of India. Owing to circumstances over which I had no control I was unable
at once to reply to Your Excellency's Kharita. But of this I may be
permitted to assure Your Excellency that the delay was not due to any
lack of interest in the subject or of readiness to offer my co-operation.
Far from it, the matter has all along been prominently before me.
(2) I have viewed with great anxiety the endeavours that have been
made to spread sedition in certain Native States and it will, I think, be
a matter of the greatest regret if these mischievous and pernicious efforts
are allowed to go any further and if States hitherto unpolluted by the
foul poison should come to be affected by it.
(3) Therefore, I welcome most heartily You Excellency's gracious
invitation to co-operate with the Government of India ; I realise that the
interests of the Government and of the Rulers of Native States are
indentical in this matter ; I cannot doubt that the spread of this agitation
must strike at'the very foundations of the priceless boon of peace and good
and settled Government that India has so long enjoyed under the wise and
just rule of the British Raj ; and I assure Your Excellency in the strongest
terms I can command, that I am at all times unreservedly willing to
associate myself with, and assist in the carrying out, of whatever line
of policy Your Excellency may think it best to adopt in meeting the
situation.
(4) I have indeed both in my public speeches and in the manifestos
I have issued to my people, already declared myself to this effect in
plainest possible language.
5. But though I have done this in view of the general situation and
for the purpose of piotecting my people from what I feel is a danger to
which they are like others constantly exposed, yet it is a matter of no
little satisfaction to me to know that my State is so far free from
sedition aud its mischievous influence. And I am Confident that by the
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF JAIPUR.
deterrent measures adopted by my Darbar, as published in the above-
mentioned manifestos, we shall be able, if not to exclude entirely tho
seditious agitator from my territories, at all events, to render his preach-
ings and machinations comparatively innocuous and to make his position
an eminently precarious one for himself.
6. I note with much satisfaction that Your Excellency's views with
regard to concerted measures to meet the situation will not involve
interference with the internal administration of the Native States. The
Jaipur Darbar, as I have said above, have alrady taken a good many
precautions. They have also, whenever necessary, been co-operating
with the Government of India, with regard to giving information about
such suspicious characters as have visited Jaipur. The Darbar are also
prepared loyally to render any further assistance that may be required
in this direction. But at the same time, I deem it advisable so far as
local conditions are concerned not to bring sedition too prominently to
the notice if my people to whom it is fortunately wholly unknown as
yet. Nevertheless, I greatly appreciate Your Excellency's kindness
in consulting me on this important subject and I desire to thank Your
Excellency cordially for the wise and liberal policy pursued by Your
Excellency's Government, which has ^resulted in the appointment of
Indian gentlemen as members of the Council of the Secretary of State
and of the Excutive Council of His Excellency the Viceroy and Governor-
General of India. In fact, the Reform Scheme, which places the people
of India under a deep and ever-lasting debt of gratitude to Your
Excellency is a sure sign of Your Excellency's kind and sympathetic
feelings towards them. Indeed after all that has been done, I find it
difficult to suggest for British India anything else that could help to
eradicate the serious evils of sedition and anarchy that prevail, but in
deference to Your Excellency's wishes I will offer such further sugges-
tions as occur to me.
(a) No doubt the measures already taken to suppress the publication
of seditious matter in newspapers have done much to lesson the present
evil, but I am constrained to say that much still remains to be done.
The persistent murderous acts perpetrated in various parts of the country,
indicate that a spirit of lawlessness is still abroad and the question is
what steps should be taken to stamp it out. The seed no doubt, was
sown by seditious newspapers but the remedy lies not in the total
suppression of newspapers, but in guiding them along right channels.
The Anglo-Indian papers have but a small circulation and they do not
reach the entire mass of literate people. I, therefore, ask cannot a
select few of the existing vernacular papers be encouraged to point out
the evils of sedition and the disasters it has brought in its train ? I
believe, if vernacular papers are rightly conducted they have the power to do
good and not harm. Can the influential moneyed and right-thinking
portion of the people not be induced to support papers and periodicals
of their own, whose main object will be to expose the pernicious teaching1
and perverted information contained in the Gutter Press, to discuss
Government measures in a loyal spirit and to circulate the correct views
of the measures and actions of Government. If informal meetings
between editors and high -placed Government officials could be arranged it
would give excellent opportunities for exchange of ideas on important
public questions. The editors who discharge their responsible duties
1&2 HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OF JAIPUR.
conscientiously should be encouraged in every way, while those that
are indiscreet should be promptly seat for and their mistakes pointed
out to them. Should this not have the desired effect, stronger measures
must of course be resorted to and the Government will be well-advised to
arm themselves with the power to take such measures. I have sanguine
hopes that this policy will provide an efficacious check on the printing of
seditious articlas and that the tone of Vernacular Press will soon improve.
The seditious movement has so far been able to influence only a small
percentage of the population and I earnestly hope that with advent and
wide circulation of righJy conducted papers the great mass of the people
will always remain, stauuchly loyalto the Suzerain povver in India.
(6) When a new daily paper or periodical is started in British India the
management of the paper should be made to deposit a certain sum of
money as a guarantee for fehe paper being conducted on right lines and
this deposit would be forfeited should the paper begin preaching seditious
doctrines. I am sure the fear of losing their money would act as an
effective check upon the tone the editors adopt.
(c) It should be impressed upon the leaders of the different
communities that it is their bounden duty to bestir themselves, to help and
deliver their deluded young men if the country is not to go to wreck and ruiu.
If organisations were formed in very important town all over the country
of the best men, the lovers of order and good Government, and if they are
induced to expose the hidden machinations of sedition-mongers, their
baneful influence will be successfully counteracted. Being composed of the
members of the same community such organisations by virtue of the
inherent knowledge they possess of the special conditions, habits and
customs of the the people, will be better able to cope with the situation
than would the most capable detective agency. Perhaps those
organisations may on occasion be able to bring to the timely notice of the
authorities the intention to disturb the peace or commit acts of violence.
(d) My next point has reference to the neglect there seems to be of
religious education, a point to which I drew Your Excellency's attention
at the state Banquet at Jaipur on the 29th October 1909. I must say I
have great faith in a system of education in Which secular and religious
instruction is harmoniously combined as the formation ot character
entirely depends upon a base- work of religion, the noble ideals which our
sacred books will put before the younger generation will, I fervently hope,
make them loyal and dutiful citizens of the Empire. In the shastras the
monarch is the embodiment of all that is Great and Good and he is
considered a Divine leader of men. Such teachings must inevitably have
their effect on impressionable young men, and it is perhaps due to such
ideals that sedition and anarchy have so small a footing in the Native
States as a whole. In the Chief's College Conference held at the Mayo
College in 190*, I impressed upon my colleagues the necessity of
religious education for the sons of Chiefs and Nobles of Rajputana. It
should be one of the principal objects in all schools for the teachers, the
pandits and the moulvies to instil in the minds of their pupils correct
notions as to the duty they owe to tho community they belong to and to
their Sovereign.
7. In conclusion, I would again wish to thank Your Excellency for
taking up this important subject and for so kindly consulting me
about it. As I have said before, I bolieve that only a small fraction of the
HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHARAJA OP ALWAR. 1 83
population of India has been contaminated by the seditious germ. But
that fraction has, it seems, been carefully organised by able, rich and
unscrupulous men. The vast majority of Indians are loyal and in their
quite undemonstrative way warmly appreciate the blessings of peace,
personal and religious liberty and security. It is the bounden duty,
therefore, of all responsible for the well-being of these law-abiding
millions to see that the of poison sedition does not reach them. This Your
Excellency means to do and such assistance as it lies in my power to give
I offer most cordially. An organised and concerted campaign, offensive
and defensive, against the common enemy is what is wanted. At the
head of this combination stand the Government of India and with it the
Ruling Chiefs of Native States, whose interests are identical with those of
the Government, and who, if I may venture to say so are looked up to as
the natural leaders of Indian society. There are also the leaders of the
different communities referred to in paragraph 6 (c) above, all these forces
standing and working together will be able to show so strong a front that
this wretched spectre of sedition that has come among us will soon be
crushed and banished from the land, and we shall return once more to the
unclouded happiness and prosperity we have always enjoyed under the
great, wise, and beneficent rule of His Majesty the King, Emperor of
Great Britain and India.
From — His Highness the Maharaja of Alwar, dated the February 1910.
After compliments. — I have much pleasure in acknowledging the
receipt of Your Excellency's Kharita of 6th August 1909, regarding
sedition and would ask you to accept my grateful thanks for the kind
assurances given in this important subject.
This new and most objectionable movement of sedition has come into
evidence more or less of recent years, and Your Excellency is well aware
with what feelings of disgust and disapproval it has all along been viewed
by the well-wishers of India and specially by the Indian Chiefs.
Your Excellency's remark is very true that the time has come when
common and concerted action is necessary in order to suppress this
movement.
The pernicious effects of this movement and the means that have been
utilized for spreading it abroad have already engaged Your Excellency's
attention, and the Acts that have been passed and other political measures
that have been adopted by Your Excellencys' Government have no doubt
been responsible for suppressing sedition a good deal. With the due
exercise of legitimate force, judicious treatment and prompt justice, the last
of which is most necessary in order to have the desired effect, it should not
be difficult to control this movement in the future.
In order, however, to deal with the subject thoroughly it is equally
necessary in my mind to keep in view the causes from where it should be
advisable, practicable and possible.
With the light of modern education and travel shining ahead the
people of this country no doubt are awakening to wider aspirations. And
with the enjoyment of absolute peace and the spread of communications
their thoughts seem to be rising towards greater political ambitions, while
the struggle of competition is drawing to their minds the ideas of mutual
comparison, liberty and prosperity.
184? HIS HIGHNESS THE MAHAR4JA OF ALWAR.
All these forces of nature are steadily gaining ground in the minds of a
rapidly growing majority of people though in however small a minority
these may be. considered to be- at present.
The spread of these new ideas in a country like India where until some
time back they have been so foreign or at any rate so scarce cannot in every
case at least for some time be expected to find favourable soil.
In order, therefore, that they may be properly assimilated so as to bear
good fruit it seems to me that the ground on which they are to be cast
must be simultaneously prepared with sound education based on teaching
religion and building character.
I had the pleasure of referring this subject to Your Excellency's kind
notice when I had the good fortune of entertaining you recently in Alwar,
and I was much encouraged with Your Excellency's remarks in reply.
I have no doubt that the Indian States should be and will be the first to
take the initiative in this matter, but my idea is that it is not the Indian
State whore these new ideas are capable of rapid development.
Though the Government of India, have all along very wisely refrained
from interference in religious ideas, I still believe that they can do a great
deal directly and indirectly to help in the encouragement of greater moral
teachings in schools, etc.
There are not wanting loyal bodies in British India, I believe, who
would not welcome such encouragement, and even if the Government
abstained from taking any direct steps, I have no doubt a great deal could
be done by indirect means.
This question, however, has by no means escaped Your Excellency's
attention as can be judged from so many public utterances you have made
on the subject when you have expressed your intimate knowledge of the
mischief that is already caused in the absence of such education.
These new aspirations and ambitions will require sympathetic, guidance
and firm control in the future and where such ambition will be incapable
of fulfilment they are likely — as they have already done in the past — to lead
to discontent.
In order to keep pace with the times the Government of India has
already taken the initial step by introducing reforms in the political machinery
of the Government which has helped in no small degree in allaying
discontent.
In cases of some more ambitious minds it may not be possible to satisfy
their aspirations, but in no case must such discontent be allowed to lead to
sedition or to take the form of violence. On the least sign of any such
.movement prompt justice and vigorous action will be necessary in order
to bear the desired results.
While Your Excellency has already been doing so much for British
India a great deal has already been done in the Indian States, and where
anarchy or sedition has shown any tendency of infection it has met as you
are aware with exemplary treatment.
JVJy opinion is that in future too such cases will receive the same kind
of treatment. So long as the movement of outsiders entering the States
•with doubtful motives is carefully watched and prompt measures are
taken when it becomes necessary I venture to hope that there will not be
much danger to fear from thisinovement gaining ground in our State,
HIS EXCELLENCY LOUD HAR&INGE S SPEECH, j 185
I feel grateful to Providence that Rajputana has so far proved the
it?r>ngest barrier against this movement and my own State. T am happy
to say my people seem well contented and free from any such infection.
I have every trust in their loyalty and allegiance and I feel certain they
will not abuse my confidence*
Regarding Your Excellency's allusion to common action being taken
on the part of the British Government and the Indian States, I can assure
Your Excellency on my behalf that I shall be willingly prepared to
co-operate in any such action as you suggest of circulating information
and watching and communicating about suspicious characters whenever it
may be necessary.
In conclusion, 1 would ask you to accept my cordial thanks for your
kind assurances of your policy of non-interference in the internal
administration of our State and for your very kind offer of assistance
should such be desired. These sentiments we not only very warmly
appreciate, but they make us all the more prepared to do what lies in our
power to help in the cause of the Empire.
HIS EXCELLENCY LORD HARDINGE'S^SPEECH IN THE OPENING OF THE
FIRST SESSION OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL IN DELHI, ON THE 27TH
JANUARY 1913.
Although I have not yet recovered from my wounds, and have been
compelled under doctor's orders to abstain from all public business of every
kind, I have felt not only a desire, but that it is my duty, to come here to-
day to open the first Session of my Legislative Council in Delhi, and to give
a cordial welcome to the newly elected and newly appointed Members of my
Council. I am sure that at the same time none of you will begrudge me an
expression of regret for those who have not returned ; since after two years
loyal and active co-operation with my Government in the legivslative work
of the Government of India, I regard them not only as former Colleagues in
Council but also as friends. I am delighted to see some of the former
Members of my Council again in their places, and 1 am confident that they
will again bring to our Council the same spirit of harmony, goodwill and
legislative ability as during the past two years that I have had the
honour of presiding over their deliberations. As regards the new Mombers
of my Council, I bid them a cordial welcome, and I am sure that I can
count on them to maintain the same high standard of dignity in debate
as has so markedly distinguished our deliberations in the past.
I feel deeply grateful to you all for the warmth of your reception here
to-day. I always knew that I could count on your sympathy in the suffering
that has been my lot during the past few weeks ; and if there has been one
thing that has tended to alleviate those sufferings, it has been the knowledge
of the sympathy shown towards me by all classes, creeds and communities
throughout the length and breadth of India. I should like to take this
opportunity when addressing my Council, who represent the whole of
British India, to express my profound gratitude for the genuine outburst
of sympathy, the devout prayers and good wishes that have been heard
on every side ; and if I may be allowed to say so, I feel convinced that
those prayers have not been unanswered. When five weeks ago I had
recovered consciousness and was able to think over what had passed, my
feelings were, in the first instance those of profound gratitude to Almighty
God for His merciful protection of Lady Hardinge and myself, of real
grief for the poor man who bad lost liis life in the performance of his duty,
136 HIS EXCELLENCY LOBD HARDINGE's SPEECH
of very deep disappointment that it were possible that such misguided
men as those who plotted and committed such a useless crime could now
be found in India, and of sorrow at the thought of the injury to the senti-
ments of the whole of the people of India who would, I knew, regard with
horror and detestation the perpetration of a crime which is contrary to
their own precepts and instincts of humauity and of loyalty, as well as to
their religious principles. The gratitude that I felt afc the miraculous
preservation by the Almighty of Lady Hardinge and myself from the hand
of the assassin was, 1 know, also deeply felt throughout India, but words
fail mo when I think of the cruel murder of thoso humble people who were
ruthlessly killed, and I deeply deplore the loss which their families have
sustained. In ray desire for kindly intercourse with the people and
accessibility to them, I have always discouraged excessive precautions,
and I trusted myself and Lady Hardinge more to the care of the people
than to that of the police. If it was an error, it is an error that I am proud
of, and I believe it may yet prove not to have been an entirely mistaken
confidence, for out of evil good may come. Is it too much to hope that the
storm of public indignation evoked at tho outrage may give Indian terrorists
cause for sensible and humane reflection and repentance ? It is difficult
to believe that these individuals are a class apart, and that they do not be-
long to communities and mix with their fellow-beings. Are they really
susceptible to no influence and no advice ? Have they no contact with
moderate and wiser men ? Still, whatever I may feel on the subject of the
crime itself, I only wish to assure you and the whole of India that this
incident will in no sense influence my attitude. I will pursue without
faltering the sam-^ policy in the future as during the past two years, and I
will not waver a hair's breadth from that course.
What I have said so far has been somewhat of personal character, but I
have one word more to say to the people of India which I say with a profound
sense of the gravity of the import of my words. I need hardly recall to the
memory of any body that the recent incident is not an isolated episode in
the history of India, but that during the past few vears both Indians and
Europeans, loyal servants of Government and of India, 'have been less-
fortunate than I have been, and undeserving of the cruel tate meted out to
theio, h.iveboen stricken down by the hand of tho assassin. These deplorable
events cast a slur on the fair na»ne of India ami the Indian people, to whom
I know they are thoroughly re-pal lent ; and I say to the people of India —
not merely as a Viceroy intensely jealous of the honour of the country that
be has been called upon to govern, but as on^ of the many millions in India
of the fellow-subjects of our King Etnparor, and one who loves India and the
Indian people amongst who;n he is living— I say that this slur must be
removed, and the fair fame of India must b<3 restored to a high and unassail-
able plane. Knowing, by the kindly and genuine manifestations of sympathy
received from every side, how profoundly repulsive such crimes are to the
people oi India, it may be asked what remedy can be applied to prevent their
recurrence. To this I would reply that such crimes cannot be dismissed
as tie isolated acts of irresponsible fanatics, and thafc they are in most
cases the outcome of organised conspiracies in which tbe actual agent of
the crime is not always the most responsible, The atmosphere which
breeds the political murderer is more easily created than dispelled. It can
only be entirely and for ever dispelled by the display and enforcement
of public opinion in a determination not to tolerate the perpetration
of such crimes and to treat as enemies of society, not only those who
commit crimes, but also those who offer any incentives to crime.
THE HON. SIR G. M CITITNAVIS. 187
Amongst guch incentives to crime should be inclir-lcd evory in temperance
of political language and methods which are likely to influence ill-
balanced minds and lead them by insidious stages to hideous crimes.
The universal condemnation throughout the whole of India of the crime
of: the 23rd December^ and the anxiety shown for the detection of the
criminals, have however filled me with hope for the future, and have
inspired nie with confidence in the determination of the people of India
to stamp out from their midst the fungus growth of terrorism and to
restore to their beautiful motherland an untarnished record of fame.
Imbued as I am with this hope and confidence, my faith in India, its
future, and its people remains unshaken; and if, as I confidently antici-
pate, the realization of my faith is confirmed, then I may add that the
two innocent lives so sadly lost on the 23rd December will not have been
sacrificed in vain.
The Horible Sir G. AL Chitnavis : — My Lord, on behalf of the non-
official Members of this Council, I crave leave to say how sincerely
gratified we all are, after the wicked attempt made upon Your Excellency's
life, to see Your Excellency presiding over the first meeting of this
Imperial Legislative Council in the new Capital of the Indian Empire.
My Lord never was the country more deeply shocked and stirred than
when it heard of the dastardly outrage perpetrated on the occasion of
your State entry into this Impeiial • city. Equally deep and wide-spread
was the feeling of relief and thankfulness at the news that by the
interposition of P, merciful Providence the attempt of the miscreant had
happily failed of its object, and Your Excellency's valuable life spared to
the people and to the Empire, My Lord, millions of hearts have ached daily
for one whole month to hear of the suffering to which Your Excellency
has been so cruel iy subjected and of the agony which Her Excellency
Lady Hardinge has had to undergo. The daily bulletins have been
anxiously awaited and clo.sely scanned, and, as rightly said by Your
Excellency, millions of men of all creeds have prayed from day to day
and week to week, in different tongues and in diverse forms to the Father
of all for Your Excellency's speedy restoration to health. Great has
been the anxiety of the people for Your Excellency's recovery. Equally
great will be the sense of relief and thankfulness and joy with which they
will receive the reassuring tidings that Your Excellency has so far recovered
as to be able to cheer us by yonr presence here to-day.
My Lord, the calm and heroic courage which Your Excellency and
Lady Hardinge displayed in the most trying circumstances, coupled with the
knowledge that Your Excellency has not allowed this detestable crime to affect
in any way your well-known sympathy and solicitude for the well-being of
the people committed to your care, has deepened their grateful admiration
and affectionate esteem for you. The noble words which have fallen from
Your Excellency's lips to-day — your kindly appreciation of the sympathy
which has been felt for Your Excellencies throughout the country and your
large-hearted and statesmanlike declaration of your determination to
adhere to your beneficent policy of administration and your solicitude
for the families of the people who lost their lives will be received
throughout the country with feelings of profound satisfaction and
gratefulness.
My Lord, I voice the feelings not only of the members of this
Council but of the whole country in wishing that Your Excellency may
soon be restored to perfect health and continue for the full term of your
office and— more—to guide the destinies of the teeming millions of this
THE HONBL1 SIR C H. ARMSTRONG.
HIS EXCELLENCf LoRD
great Empire and we hope that before long the culprits will be found odt
and that this crime will be uprooted and the fair fame of India will be
re-established.
Tlie Hon'ble Sir C. If. Armstrong /—Your Excellency, on behalf of
the European members of this Council, I venture to say how very pleased
and thankful we are to see you here to-day, restored to health, after the
awful crime perpetrated upon yon on the "day of the State entry. We have
watched with the very greatest Interest the daily reports of yo»ar health,
and congratulate you most heartily on your wonderful recovery and escape.
We earnestly hope thai you may be spared to continue your good work
amongst us, and that you may soon be restored to that perfect health
without which the grtat work you have undertaken cannot be carried cm.
We deplore more than I can say the awful crime that Was perpetrated
against you, and can only hope that by firm and good government, deeds
of this character will be completely wiped out. Lot me assure you again
what a very great pleasure it is to see you here again to-day.
• • » _ * *
Extract from the speech of Sis Excellency Lord Hardinge in the Council
of the 17tk Septembder 1913.
There has been elsewhere another centre of disturbance, where I hope
and truat that, with the growing co-operation of the inhabitants, normal
conditions may be soon restored. I allude to the regrettable leerudesence
of dacoities that has taken place during the past few months in the eastern
part oi Bengal, some of them being of a particularly savage character.
I do uot want to exaggerate the importance of these deplorable
incidents, but one may well ask the cause and origin of such acts in
a Presidency where any excuse for disorder and unrest has been removed
by the gracious announcements of the King- Emperor and and it would
be difficult to find an answer to this inquiry. Some of these dacoities
perpetrated by so called bhadralog have been described as political
dacoities. Personally I fail to see any difference between an ordinary dacoity
and a political dacoity. They are both crimes of a heinous description,
while the perpretators, be they bbadralog or others, are all criminals of
equal degree, the bhadralog being, if anything, worse than the others, since
from their position they have not some the same temptation brought on by
want and misery, and from their education they ought to know better.
It is a scurce of profound regret to me that students from schools and
colleges should, on more than one occasion, have taken part in such pro-
ceedings. Very different indeed was the conduct of those students from
the schools and colleges and University of Calcutta who went to the relief
of the unfortunate sufferers from the recent terrible floods, who were in
danger of death from hunger or drowning. Those are the young men whom
we can honestly and heartily admire for their courage and endurance.
I trust that some of those ill-advised young men who engage in
dacoities may take my words to heart and turn over a new leaf, tor the
injury inflicted on respectable families by the acts of some of their
younger members under the evil influences to which unfortunately they
are often exposed in some of their schools and colleges, has become a
serious matter in Bengal, and calls for active co-operation on the part of
the respectable bulk of the population with the authorities to ensuia
internal peace, without which it is impossible to secure the progress and
development of the Presidency which we all desire to see.
Judgment of the Hijfe Court, Calcutta, ia tie matter ot a,
petition af Mahomed All, (1st Camber 1913™
The Judgment of the Court Was as follows ;— *
Jenkins, C. J.— -This is an application to the High Court under section
17 of the Indian Press Act, 1910, to set aside what is described as an
order of forfeiture under section 12 of that Act.
The order of which complaint Is made was published in the Calcutta
Gazette, Extraordinary, July 22nda1913. and runs as follows j— *
"NOTIFICATION.
" No, 2296 P. D. The 18th July 1913. Whereas it appeal to the
Governor in Council that a pamphlet, entitled " Come over into Macedonia
and help us' ' contains words of the nature described in section 4, sub-
section (1) of the Indian Press Act, 1910 (I of 1910) inasmuch as they
are likely to bring into hatred or contempt certain classes of His Majesty's
subjects in British India.
" Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by section 1 2, sub-
section ( 1 ) of the said Act, the Governor in Council hereby declares all
copies of the said pamphlet wherever found to be forfeited to His Majesty.''
This is not the first pronouncement on this pamphlet, for by a
similar notification published in the Gazette of India on the 16th July
1913' the Governor General in Council declared the pamphlet to be
forfeited.
And even before this there had been notification to the same effect
by the Government of Bombay.
Section 12 (I) is in these terms. *' Where any newspaper, book or
other document wherever printed appears to the Local (iovernment to
contain any words, signs or visible representations of the nature described
in section 4, sub-section (1), the Local Government, may by notification
in the Local Official Gazette, stating the grounds of its opinion, declare
such newspaper, book or other document to be forfeited to His Majesty.
The relevant portions of section 4 are as follows . —
" Whenever it appears to the Local Government that any printing
press in respect of which any security has been deposited as required by
section 3 is used for the purpose of printing or publishing any news-
paper, book or other document containing any words, signs or visible
representations which are likely or may have a tendency, directly or
indirectly, whether by inference, suggestion, allusion, metaphor implica-
tion or otherwise * * *
To bring into hatred or contempt any class or section of His Majesty's
subject in British India."
Then the consequences indicated in the Act are to follow.
There is a curious difference between the language of section 4 and of
section 12. Under section 4 what may be declared to be forfeited is
" all copies of such newspaper, book or other document." Under section
1 2 what may be declared to be forfeited is "such newspaper, book or
other document/' Section 12 stands alone in this respect and its langu-
age may be contrasted with that of sections 6, 7, 9, 11, 13, 16, and 20 as
well as section 4. I doubt whether any difference of operation was
intended.
Section 17 entitles any person having an interest in any property
in respect of which an order of foifeiture has been made under section 12
190 THE MATTER OF A PETITION OF MAriOMMED ALl, 19lB.
to apply to the High Court to set aside the order, but only on the ground
that tho newspaper, book or other document in respect of which tile order
was made did not contain any words, signs or visible representations of
the nature described in section 4, sub-section (1). Together with this
Section must be read section 22 by which, with a qualified exception in
favour of the High Court, all jurisdiction is in effect barred. This
section, save for the exception, reproduces section 16 of the short-lived
Pre.ss Act of 1878, commonly known as the Vernacular Press Act. Two
conditions then are necessary to a forfeiture in accordance with the terms
of section 12. First it must appear to the Local Government that the
publication contains words, signs or visible representations of the
nature described in section 4, sub-section (1), and, secondly, the Local
Government must, by notification in the Local Official Gazette, stating
the grounds of its opinion, declare such publication to be forfeited to His
Majesty. The first condition implies that the publication had been seen
and read by the Local Government prior to its declaration of forfeiture,
for it must first form an opinion. Though there is uo evidence as to
this, the Advocate-General assured us that a copy must have been in the
Local Government's possession before the declaration. I will assume
this to be so. The second condition is one which has given rise to con-
siderable discussion. It has been urged that it is a necessary condition
of an effective forfeiture that the grounds of the Local Government's
opinion should be stated, and that this has not been done in the present
case.
Oa hearing that it appears to the Government in any particular case
that there are words of the nature described in section 4, (l\ the first
question that occurs to anyone whose duty it is to enquire, is, why does
it so appear, what are the grounds of its opinion ?
Those responsible for this Act foresaw this, and so they specifically
provided that the forfeiting notifications should state the grounds of the
Local (Jovernment's opinion. But when we turn to the notification no
such grounds are stated ; nothing in the nature of a fact is set forth, there
is merely a citation of those words of che section which are invoked.
The notification amplified to fit the circumstances of this case seems to
take this shape ;
" It appears to the Local Government that these are words likely to
bring into hatred or contempt a class or 'section of His Majesty's
subjects in British India and the grounds of its opinion are that the
words are likely to bring into hatred or contempt certain classes of His
Majesty's subjects in India."
But that repetition of an opinion cannot be its grounds, and yet that
is all that the notification furnishes in the shape of grounds, This is
obviously insufficient and not a compliance with the terms of the Act.
Moreover I think that this direction in the section is mandatory, and
that the Legislature intended to impose, and has imposed, on the Local
Government an imperative obligation to state the grounds of its opinion.
Tho language of section 4 may be compared. It requires that the
notice forfeiting the copies of the publication should be in writing und
state or describe the offending words, signs or visible representations.
These provisions as to the statements to be contained in forfeiting docu-
ment* were, I think, designedly inserted and were intended u> be a
THE MATTER OF A PETITION OF MAHJMMfcD AL1, 1913. 191
check on the power of forfeiture vested in the Local Government • for
it is easy to see that the obligation to state grounds furnishes a voluable
safeguard.
The statement of ground* miy for another reason to be regarded
as an essential part of the Legislature's scheme ; for it mio-ht help the
High Court to perform the duties cast on it under section I?"
And in fact we have in this case been considerably embarrassed as
will appear later, by the absence of grounds
The notification therefore appears to me to be defective in a material
particular, and but for section 22 of the Act it would (in my opinion) be
our duty to hold that there had been no legal forfeiture.
That section however provides that every declaration purporting fco be
made under the Act shall, as against all persons be conclusive evidence
that the forfeiture therein referred to has taken place. The result is that
though I hold the notification does not comply with the provisions of the
Act, still we are (in my opinion) barred from questioning the legality of
the forfeiture it purports to declare.
This brings me to the question whether the pamphlet under discus-
sion contains words of the nature described in section 4, sub-section (1).
The provisions of section 4» are very comprehensive, and its language
is as wide as human ingenuity could make it. Indeed, it appears to me
to embrace the whole range of varying degrees of assurance from certainty
on the one side to the very limits of impossibility, on the other.
It is difficult to see to what lengths the operation of this section might
not be plausibly extended by an ingenious mind.
They would certainly extend to writings that jnay even command
approval.
An attack on that degraded section of the public which lives on th&
misery and shame of others would come within this wide-spread net,,
the praise of a class might not be free from risk. Much that is regarded
as standard literature might undoubtedly be caught.
It is however urged that even so this pamphlet is outside both the
spirit and the words of the section. And now 1 will notice the argu-
ment that has been addressed to us as to this,
The pamphlet, it is said, is an appeal to His Majesty's subjects,,
followers of Christian faith ; and it is an appeal to them as Christiana
to move the British Government to such individual or collective action
as will put a stop to outrages that shock all feelings of humanity, if they
in fact occurred.
And so, it is contended this is an appeal to the people of a Christian
nation, just because they are a Christian nation, and thus would be the
first to protest against the cruel disregard of the principles of its
faith, by some who profess to be its adherents, and against acts so abomin~
able as to have earned the scathing denunciation of the Christian Monarch
of one of the allied nations. Nor does the argument rest there ; for it is
brought to our notice that the pamphlet contains passages which show
192 THE MATTER OP A i»ETITION OP MAttOMMBD ALI, 1913.
that Christianity as a creed is not attacked, notably that which states
(page 2£) that it " was ever the symbol of humanity and mercy ° ; and
that it states that those who were fighting under the cross betrayed
it. It is true that it refers to Crusades (page 3) but this has reference
not to any Crusade proclaimed by Christianity but to the proclamation
of the King of Bulgaria. On the other hand, there are passages which
expressly state that Turkish excesses are not condoned, which shew that
the Christians are not attacked as such and narrate the protests made
and help given by Christians other than the Balkan allies engaged in
the war. There is no racial or political tie between the Balkan allies
and the Christian subjects of His Majesty's in India which would make
it possible that wrongs committed by the former should be considered
imputable to the latter. Nor is there really any credal link because it is
not suggested that the acts complained of were done in the name of and
wirh the authority of Christianity but in betrayal of it. On the contrary,
it is argued, the suppression of this pamphlet might tend in the Mussal-
man mind to band the Christians of the country with the authors of
these wrongs and make it appear that it was desired that these should
not be nvide public lest they might throw discredit on Christian subjects
in India.
The pamphlet then, it is said, so far from bringing Englishmen or
His Majesty's Christian subjects into hatred or^contempt is the highest
compliment that could be paid to them,
This is the argument and it may be a very forcible one when addressed
to those who can be swayed by it. The executive Government can be
moved by such reflections ; our investigation is of a more prosaic order.
The Advocate General has admitted, and I think very properly, that
the pamphlet is not seditious and does not offend against any provision
of the criminal law of India.
But he has contended, and rightly in my opinion, that the provisions
of the Press Act extend far beyond the criminal law ; and he has argued
that the burden of proof is cast on the applicant, so that however meritor-
ious the pamphlet may be, stilt if the applicant Cannot establish the
negative the Act requires, his application must fail.
And what is this negative. It is not enough for the applicant to show
that the words of the pamphlet are not likely to bring into hatred or
contempt any class or section of His Majesty's subjects in British India,
or that they have not a tendency in fact to bring about that result. But
he must go further, and show that it is impossible for them to have that
tendency either directly or indirectly, and whether by way of inference
pugorestion, allusion, metaphor or implication. Nor is that all, for we
find that the Legislature has added to thU the all embracing phrase
" or otherwise."
• may> ??* inaPPr°P»ately, invite attention'to section 153 A
the Penal Code which has such affinity to the statutory provision
governing this case .that it may ; be regarded as its basis. That section
was added to the Ponal Code in 1898, and was directed a-ainst the
promotion and attempts to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between
ainereut classes.
THE MATTER OF A PETITION OP MAHOMMED ALT, 1913. 193
It will be noticed that the feeling here described is one of enmity or
hatred : no provision is made for contempt. But the more important
divergence is that while the Penal Code requires that the enmity or
hatred should be not only towards a class but by a class, there is no such
limitation in the Press Act as to the source from which these hostile
feelings should proceed ; it aims against all hatred or contempt regardless
of those by whom it Is entertained. Nor is this the only direction in
which there is a greater stringency in the Press Act. To section 153A
there is appended an explanation which declares it not to be an offence
to point out, without malicious intention and with an honest view to
their removal, matters which are producing or have a tendency to produce
the feelings of enmity or hatred, indicated in the section. And yet no
such qualifying words are to be found in section 4 of the Press Act, and
this is the more remarkable because the qualifying explanation of section
124) A are introduced, though they relate to an even graver otfence.
It may be that this omission was an oversight ; but whether that be
so or not the Government insists on the absence of this explanation,
though it leads to a curious result.
I think the Government is entitled to stand on the letter of the law
though it deprives Mr Mohained Ali of an opportunity of relying on an
explanation conceived in the spirit of that which forms part of section
153 A of the Penal Code,
Had the Press Act incorporated the explanation to section 153 A, as it
has that to section 124 A, Mr. Mohamed Ali might perhaps have made a
very strong case in view of the Advocate-General's admission as to the
character of the pamphlet and the applicant's purpose and intentions.
The applicant however contends strenuously that the pamphlet does
not come even within these all-embracing terms of the Act, and that the
Legislature aimed at something wholly different. The incalculable
powers of forfeiture vested in the executive are a sure sign th.it the Act
was called into being by urgent political necessity. And it is of sufficiently
recent date to enable us all to remember that the mischief chiefly aimed
at was the prevalence of political assassination and anarchical outrage.
Comprehensive words were designedly used to catch crime and the
incitement to crime posing in the guise of innocence.
The Act was directed against crime and aimed at its prevention. I doubt
whether publication with an authorship, a source, and a purpose like those
of the present p imphlet were thought of ; and I recognise the force of
the argument that the Act is now being applied to a purpose never
intended. But be that so or not, if the Legislature has employed langu-
age wide enough to cover the pamphlet, this lack of reserve affords no
answer to the forfeiture DOW attacked.
I have already dealt with one phase of the absence of grounds in the
notification. This defect, and the Government's failure to place before us
any materials beyond those furnished by the applicant have sensibly
added to our difficulties in discharging the peculiar duties cast on us by
the Act.
The notification does not even specify the classes that might be
brought into hatred or contempt or which of these twa diverse sehtitnents
194 THE MATTER OF A PETITION OP MAHOMMED ALT, 1913*
is apprehended. And so when Mr. Norton rose to address the Court he '
had to seek this information from the Advocate-General
The first answer implied that it included Christians, Greeks and Eng-
lishmen ; but as under the Act the classes are limited to those composed
of His Majesty's subjects in India, the Greeks were withdrawn and the
first and the last retained. Still the answer in its original form is not
without its significance, though it was afterwards modified.
The pamphlet would doubtless bring into hatred the unchristian
Christians whose deeds of atrocity are described. The theory presented
is that the reflection of this hatred might fall, not indeed on the Govern-
ment bnt on His Majesty's Christian and English subjects in British India,
If this be the Government's view with all the information at its disposal,
the Court, no more informed than the man in the street, cannot (in my
opinion) afnrrn this could not be so, and affirm it with a degree of assur-
ance that would entitle it to set aside a measure of safety on which
the Government had solemnly resolved.
The Advocate -General has convinced me that the Government's view
of this piece of legislation is correct, fand that the High Court's power of
intervention is the narrowest : its power to pronounce on the legality of
the forfeiture by reason of failure to observe the mandatory conditions of
the act is barred : the ability to pronounce on the wisdom of the executive
order is withheld : and its functions are limited to considering whether the
applicant to it has discharged the almost hopeless task ot establishing
that his pamphlet does not contain words which fall within the all com-
prehensive provision of the Act. I describe it as an almost hopeless task,
because the terms of section 4 are so wide that it is scarcely conceivable
that any publication would attract the notice of the Government in this
connection to which some provision of that section might not " directly or
indirectly whether by inference, suggestion, allusion, metaphor, implication
or otherwise apply "•
I have said that the ability to pronounce on the wisdom or unwisdom
of executive action has been withheld. There was good reason for this.
Courts of law can only move on defined lines and act on information
brought before them under limited conditions.
It is not so with the executive authority. It would be paralysed if it
had to observe the restrictions placed on the Courts.
Its action can be prompted by information derived from sources not
open to the Courts, and based on considerations forbidden to them ; it can
be moved by impressions and personal experiences to which no expression
can be given in a Court, but which may be a very potent incentive to
executive action.
The Government may be in possession of information which it would
be impossible to disclose in a Court of law, and yet obviously requiring
immediate action.
Therefore a jurisdiction to pronounce on the wisdom or unwisdom o*
executive action has been withheld and rightly withheld. It may be a
question whether even the semblance which this Act provides should not
have been withheld as it was by Act IX of 1878.
THE MATTER OF A PETITION OF MAHOMMED ALT, 1913. 195
Political considerations and reasons of State are the life-blood of
executive action, but they have no place in a Court of law. The '« constitu- .
tion " said Lord Mansfield, " does not allow reasons of State to influence our
judgement : Godjbrbid it should — we must not regard political consequences
how formidable soever they might be : if rebellion was the certain conse-
quenc? we are bound to say, Fiat jiustitia ruat coelum," [case of John
W tikes].
The fact is that the executive and judicial authorities stand on wholly
different planes for the purpose of arriving at a decision as to the propriety
of executive action. And the one cannot sitjin judgment on the determina-
tions of the other. Si judicas, cognosce, si regnas,jube.
And what then is the conclusion of: the whole matter ; of the two alleged
checks on executive action, supposed to be furnished by the Act, one,
the intervention of Courts, is ineffectual, while the other, for this very
reason, can be, and in this case, has been disregarded, without impairing
the practical effect of a forfeiture purporting to be under the Act.
One word more, and that is as to the motive of the present applicaton.
The applicant, Mr. Mahomed AH, is by no means unknown in India ; he
is a journalist of position and repute.
Though he is not an^accused, he tells us that he regards himself as
under the stigma which (he declares) must attach to any journalist who
has come under the operation of an Act directed, primarily at any rate
against a criminal movement marked by outrages which so shocked
the public sentiment as to call for this drastic legislation, But even if he
has not succeeded in proving the negative that fate and the law have
thrown in his way, at least his application has not been wholly in vain.
The Advocate-General representing the Government, has publicly
announced, that Mr Mahomed Ali's forfeited pamphlet is not, in his opinion,
a seditious libel, and indeed that he attributes no criminal offence to
Mr. Mahomed Ali : he was even willing to concede and believe he was actin^
in the highest interests of humanity and civilization. In this I think the
Advocate-General made no admission which it was not proper for him to
make.
Mr Mahomed Ali then has lost his book, but retains his character ; and
Vie is free from the stigma that he apprehended, and this doubtless will be
some consolation to him when we dismiss, as we must, his present
application. I think there should be no order as to cost.
STEPHEN J. — I agree with the Chief Justice that this application must
be dismissed. In view however of its novelty, and of the difficulties
to which it gives rise, I consider that I should express my own view of
the questions involved. If we take advantge of the statement made by the
Advocate General that the classes whom it is alleged the pamphlet before
us is likely to bring into hatred are Englishmen and Christians, and con-
fine our attention to the parts of the Press Act that apply to the present
case, the position we are in may be correctly described as follows : —
It appeared to the Local Government that the pamphlet before us
contained words that were likely directly, indirectly or (to abbreviate J in
any possible way, to bring Englishmen or Christians being His Majesty's
subjects in British India, into hatred as a class. They accordingly published
196 THE MATTER OF A PETITION OF MAHOMMED All, 1913.
& notification in the Local Gazette declaring the pamphlet forfeited, and
giving as a ground of their opinion that^the pamphlet was likely to-
bring Englishmen ami Christiana into hatred, the fact that it was likely
to bring them into hatred. The result of this notification was that the
police in Calcutta confiscated the pamphlet, arid Mr Mahomed AH now
applies before us to set aside the confiscation on the ground that the
pamphlet is not likely to bring such Englishmen and Christians as have
been described into hatred, and it is this negative proposition thai)
Mr, Norton seeks to prove on his behalf.
The case he makes before us is twofold. In the first place he says
that the pamphlet cannot have the effect ascribed to it. In the second
he says that the notification published by the Government is bad because
it does not state the grounds of the opinion that the Government have
formed about the pamphlet, which it must do according to section 12,
that therefore the confiscation is illegal, and there is no ground for the
application he is making. He naturally presses for a decision on the
first ground, but, if he cannot obtain that, he asks for a declaration that
the notification and the confiscation are both bad.
Logically however the question of our jurisdiction must be considered
first. As to this I am of opinion that the notification is not according
to law. Looking at the section, and indeed at the Act as a whole, I have
no doubt that the provision in section 12 that the grounds of the opinion
on which the Local Government have acted must be stated, is mandatory
and not merely directory. There can be no doubt that it is framed for
the protection of any person whose property may be confiscated, and
not merely for purposes of administrative convenience. The ground of
an opinion must in this case, if not always, be a fact or {acts, and no
fact is disclosed merely by specific relations of the elements that the
law requires to be present in order for legal consequences to follow. I
have already described the statement of the grounds in terms which seem
to me to lead to an absurdity ; but I have taken pains to make them
correct. I cannot say what facts should be stated. I do not think, for
example, that it can be the case that the Local Government should state
to us all the information, on which they have acted, for 1 cannot suppose
that we are to revise their action as a whole. On the other hand we have
it appears, power to revise their action to some extent, and for this
purpose some statement of fact seems essential.
But because the law has not been followed in this matter, I cannot hold
that the notification is void in such a way as to deprive us of jurisdiction.
For, such are the provisions of this Act, that if our jurisdiction to revise
the action of the Government under section 17 is taken away, no other
remedy is open to the person whose property is confiscated, and the
Local Government can by their own laches deprive him of the only relief
that the law provides. Such a conclusion seems to me so contrary to
all principles of justice that I cannot accept it or apply to the present
case the general principle that where exceptional powers are conferred on
an executive authority and a special procedure for their exercise is provided,
a failure to follow that procedure will prevent an exercise of those
powers. Also, though I cannot say what facts are to be stated in order
to disclose the ground for the opinion on which the Local Government
acts, I tli ink it may be the case that a statement of facts too meagre to
THE MATTER OF A PETITION OF MAHOMMED ALl, 1913. 197
give an applicant under section 17 any real assistance, would be sufficient
to satisfy the requirements of section ]2. Further our jurisdiction is
very closely confined by the teims of section 19, with winch section 17
and 22 must be read ; and I have doubts whether it may not be that
we can only answer the question indicated in section 17, assuming that
everything else has been rightly done.
I am of opinion, therefore, that we have jurisdiction to consider the
question before us on its merits, and it is my duty therefore to do so. It
is impossible however to do this without first noticing the point of view
from which Mr. Norton has asked us to consider the case. He did not
contend that this Act was penal, but he dwelt at length on the inten-
tions of the persons who wrote the pamphlet, apparently in Constanti-
nople, and of the applicant who as I understand published it, or at least
proposed to publish it here. With these 1 conceive that we have nothing
to do directly, we have only to consider what effect the publication is
likely to produce. The intentions of the writers and publisher may be
of importance on the principle that they are not likely to produce an
effect they did not intend but otherwise we need not consider them.
Nor can I accede to the argument that this Act was passed only to
prevent active crime. I can only judge of its purpose from its contents,
and as I read it, its purpose is to prevent the publication of anything
that may be dangerous in any of the ways described in section* 4 ; and
the means supplied to Government for doing this have no relation to the
propriety of the conduct, still less to the criminality, of the publisher or
the readers. The purpose of the Act as I read it may be to prevent
crime : not by detecting ur punishing criminals, but by preventing
persons now innocent from becoming criminals. Consequently I need
scarcely say that I consider that no slur has been cast on Mr. Mahomed's
character by the confiscation of his pamphlet. A man may own a mad
dog without blame ; and no slur is cast on his character if it is confiscated.
This view is in my opinion confirmed by a reference to the provision*
of the Penal Code that deal with cognate matters. By section 153A of
that Code, it is an offence to promote feelings of enmity between different
classes of His Majesty's subjects, but it is explained that it is not an
offence to point out without malicious intentions, and with an honest
view to their removal, matters which are producing or have a tendency to
produce such feelings of hatred. Thus when the law is dealing with
the matter of creating hatred of a class from the point of view of the
criminal law, its action is restricted to cases where what is promoted is
hatred by one class of another, and words and so forth used without
mailce and honestly to remove the causes of hatred are not punishable.
But in the present case the law applies to hatred by any one, possibly
only by one man and the explanation as to the intention of the person
who used them is omitted. It seems that the Legislature must have
had section 153 A in view when it enacted section 4 (c) of the Press Act,
and I therefore suppose that the omission in the latter of any provision
like the explanation in the former was intentional. Again Explanation
II of section 4 (1} of the Press A<"t excludes from the scope of the Act
" comments expressing disapprobation of the measures of the Govern-
ment .... with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means,
or of the administration or other action of the Government . .
without .... exciting or attempting to excite hatred." This is
198 THE MATTER OF A PETITION OF MAHOMMED ALT, 1913.
obviously adopted from two explanations to section 124A of the Penal
Code, which are applicable here, because if hatred is in fact . . . .
excited the explanation does not apply, whatever may have been the
intention of the person who excited it.
From the relation of this Act to the Penal Code, I conclude
that the scope of this Act has been made far wider than that of the Code.
So wide indeed are the powers that the Legislature has conferred on
the Government that they would be able to confiscate a newspaper
containing words that might cause one man to hate, or even to contemn, a
class, if such there should unhappily be, who sought to embarrass tho
Government of the country by murder and robbery. When sucli wide
powers were conferred on Government, I cannot but suppose that it was
intended that they should be widely used.
This brings me to the actual question that I conceive that I have to
decide, namely, whether Mr. Norton has shown that the pamphlet before
us is not likely to bring Englishmen and Christians into hatred. And in
attempting to form an opinion on it, I find myself in a position which
is unfamiliar to me, and in which, as far as I am aware no Judge in the
British Empire has been placed, since the remote da}rs of early English
Jurisprudence. I have to decide a question of fact on such evidence as
is supplied by one document. The side on whom the onus of proving
his case is cast is not in a position to give any evidence. As the other
side has not called any witnesses, no cross-examination has taken place.
The answer to the question I have to decide depends on the social
and political state of the Mohammedans in India, or perhaps of certain
sections of them. As to this such information that I have is unverified
and general to a high degree ; it has never been my duty to acquire in-
formation on the matter ; and absolutely none has been supplied to me
on this occasion. Under these circumstances I have no doubt that any
opinion I may express will be received by others with the respect that
is due to the office I have the honour to hold ; but it will be impossible
for me to share in this feeling. The question put to us is so framed
that any doubtful point is to be decided against the applicant.
Coming to the pamphlet itself I have no doubt that I must answer
the question before me against the applicant. Generally speaking I
suppose from its contents that it is the work of avowed partisans of
the Turks in their war against the Christian Balkan States. The object
cf the writers, and here their intention becomes relevant, is to put an
end to horrible atrocities which they allege to have been committed by
the allies on Mohammedans. To do this they tell Englishmen what is
being done by their fellow Christians and appeal to them, as Christians, to
stop it. In more detail I find statements that the Moslem population
of Macedonia is being practically annihilated by murder, outrage and
pillage ; if this passes unnoticed and uncondemned there will be a cleavage
between Mohammedans and English. Then follows a series of j charges of
misgovernment and a catalogue of horrible outrages, the detail of which
I may pass over, but all of which, I think I am correct in saying, are
represented as having been perpetrated by Christians. In conclusion the
readers of the pamphlet are informed that the Government of England
\villdonothing to stop the outrages unless forced to by public opinion,
and it is stated that they can stop them if they will. Thuiu^hout the
THE HON'BLE MR. BANERJEE, 1913. 199
whole of the pamphlet the outrages mentioned are imputed to the Allies
whose Christianity is constantly referred to. There are cases in which
accounts are given of how Christians tried to prevent or mitigate what
was going on j but the almost avowed object of the pamphlet is to excite
the indignation of Christians in England against the conduct of Christians
in Macedonia so as to induce them to bring it to an end.
The disinterested humanity of the writers is beyond question, and
they ceitainly have right to make an appeal to Englishmen as they did.
Mr. Mohamed Ali is entitled to a presumption that he acted with like
humanity, and it is not suggested that he committed any unlawful act
or did anything wrong in publishing the pamphlet in India. But these
considerations do not touch the question whether the pamphlet is not
likely to make Mohammedans hate Christians. A perusal of the accounts
of the outrages is likely to excite anger in the mind of any reader who
does not regard the pamphlet as a. false document, which we have no
reason for doing. I can well understand that in the mind of some Indian
Mohammedans anger might easily and perhaps justifiably turn to a
hatred of the Allies, from which, making allowances for the infirmities
of human nature, a hatred of the co-religionists of the Allies would seem
but a short step especially for those whose co-religionists are involved in
a national disaster.
Such is my opinion on the question I have to answer. Acting on
such information as I have, I entertain no doubt as to what my answer
should be. But the absence of doubt is probably largely due to the
absence of evidence, and cannot be taken as going far towards showing
that the opinion is correct.
I agree that costs should not be awarded in this case*
WOODROFFE, J. — I agree with the judgment of the Chief Justice.
Proceedings of the Council of the Governor-General of India for
making Laws and Regulations held on Friday, the 9th
January 1911.
lie solution Jor Amendment of the Press Act.
The Hon'ble Mr. Banerjee said : — Sir, my Eesolution refers to the
Press Act of 1910 known as Act I of that year. I have no desire to
revive the memories of a controversy now passed and I hope forgotten,
but it is useless to disguise the fact that the Bill was passed amid some
opposition in this Council and considerable opposition in the country.
Reading through the reports of the debate which took place in February,
1910, I find that there was a general desire evinced by the non-official
Indian Members that it should be a temporary measure and should not find
a place among the permanent statutes of the land. That view, however,
did not commend itself to the majority and the Act has been added to
the stock of our permanent legislation. Sir, the Act has now been in ope-
ration for a period close upon four years, and we are in a position to judge
of its character. How it has worked, what are its defects and how they
may be remedied— these seem to me, Sir, to be pertinent and relevant
issues. They force upon our minds the conviction that the Act should be
200 THE HOBBLE MR. BAFATUEE, 1914s,
repealed, or, at any rate, should be modified, and that, if it is to be modified,
it should be at least upon the lines of the suggestions contained in my
Resolution. That, Sir, represents what I may describe as the ' irreducible
minimum ' which the opinion of the educated community demands, aa
the first definite step towards what they hope will lead to the final
annulment of this Act. Sir, that this Act is bound to be repealed
sooner or later-^sooner I hope than later —is as clear as the noon-day
sun ; for it is inconsistent with the great traditions of British ruJe and
those noble principles of government which are incarnated in British
administration. No concession to popular freedom has been made by the
British Grovernraent in India which has ever been withdrawn. The Jury
Notification was cancelled ; the Vernacular Press Act was repealed ,4 and
so will it be with this Act in the fulness of time, I submit, Sir, that the
Government of India, standing at the head of the nation, becoming every
day more and more nationalistic in its views by the breadth and liberality
of its policy, ought to show us the way. Sir, the Act gives very large
powers to the police. Under the provisions of section 8 of the Act, the
magistrate is empowered to ask the publisher or printer of a newspaper,
when he applies for registration, to find security. This power is
exercised practically by the police. The magistrate in this case is the police
and the police is the Criminal Investigation Department. Only the other
day, in the case of the Habul Matin, a Persian Journal published in
Calcutta, it was not the Local Government but the magistrate which
demanded security at the instance of the Commissioner of Police. That
surely was not the intention of the original framers of the Act.
The interposition of the magistrate meant the exercse of judicial
discretion and was intended to be a safeguard against the aberrations of
executive authority. One of the greatest anomalies of the Act is that
whereas a right is given to the aggrieved party to make an appeal against
an order of forfeiture, no such right is allowed when the order for deposit
of security is given, and the High Court has recently held in the case to
which I have referred that even its revisional powers are not available
in a case of this kind. Sir, thus in the absence of any safeguard of this
kind, the result has been that many newsp ipers which were called upon
to find security have ceased publication. I hold in my hand a abatement
giving the names of some of the newspapers thus dealt with. I find
17 newspapers were asked to give secuuty. Of these 3 were Hindu
papers and 14 Mohammedan £and not having been able to give security,
they all ceased publication. The case of one of these papers, the
Ahli Hadis of Amritsar, is very peculiar. It published a letter replying
to certain strictures which had appeared in a Missionary organ reflecting
upon the Mohammedan faith. This newspaper was asked to furnish
security, but it does not appear that the book which published the
strictures upon the Mohammedan faith was at all taken notice of. Then,
Sir, passing from the papers which ceased to exist, we have a number
of those which gave the security. The number according to the list
which I have in my hand is 15 — D Mohammedan, 4 Hindu, 1 Sikh and
1 Anglo-Indian. The case of the Zamindar of Lahore calls for notice.
It has been required to give security to the extent of Us. 10,000. The
head and front of its offence was that it protested against the removal of
a mosque. The justice of the complaint was admitted ; the mosque was
restored; but in consequence of certain remarks which it made against
the respected head of the Government of the United Provinces, the
THE HON'BLE MR, BANARJEE. 2f>l
paper was asked to give a security of Es. 10,000. I will say this at once,
that I have seen these remarks ; I deplore them ; I consider them to
very discourteous, very disrespectful, very objectionable ; but at the
s;f me time, it seems to me that it would have been quite worthy of a
great Government, if instead of demanding security to the extent of
Us. 10,000, the Editor was sent for and sharply reprimanded. There is
one other case to which I want to refer. Amongst those that were
required to give security, there was an Anglo-Indian newspaper named
the Cawnpore Herald. Somewhere about the year 1912 an article called
1 A Dramatic Scene ' appeared in that paper, The Deputy Superintendent
of Police called upon tho proprietress of the paper, and wanted to know
who the writer was. Naturally enough, she declined to give the name.
Then she called on the magistrate; tho magistrate said that it was very
improper on her part to permit her newspaper to be the means of criticism
directed against the police and the municipality, and that she had no
business to have the press moved about from place to place. Tho upshot
of it all was that she was required to find security to the extent of
Rs. 500. She submitted a memorial to the Government of India
somewhere about the year 1912. My information is that, up to this time,
she has not received any reply of any kind.
' Passing from these cases, let me note the vigour with which the Act
has been worked under the different Governments. Through the courtesy
of my hon'ble friend, the Home Secretary, I have been furnished with
a statement. I find from it that for the three years during which
the Act has been in operation, there have been 807 cases altogether dealt
with under the Act. Of these, 239 were cases under sections 3 and 8,
in which deposit of security was required ; and the other cases were under
section 12, in which certain publications and- pamphlets were declared
to be forfeited. If we take the figure 807 for three years, it comes to
this, that there was an action taken almost every day of the year. This
seems to me to indicate very great vigour on the part of the different
departments superintending the operation of this Act. All this indicates
the urgent need there is for the supervision of public opinion over the
operation of this Act.
Passing from facts, let me come to the authoritative expression of
opinion. I will not refer to the popular verdict, for that may not
commend itself to gentlemen on the other side of the House ; but I will
cite an authority of unquestioned weight; whose pronouncement, I am
. sure, will command the implicit acquiescence of all members, be they
official or non-official. Let me the quote opinion of the Chief Justice of
the High Court of Bengal when delivering judgment in the Comrade
case. This is what Sir Lawrence Jenkins said : —
The provisions of section 4 are very comprehensive, and its language is as wide as
human ingenuity could make it. Indeed, it appears to me to embrace the whole range of
varying degrees of assurance from certainty on the one side to the very limits of impossibility
on the other. It is difficult to see to what lengths the operation of this section may nofc
plausibly be extended by an ingenious mind. They would certainly extend to writings that
may even command approval, An attack on that degraded section of the public which lives
on the misery and shame of othersjwould come within this widespread net, the praise of a
class might not be free from the risk. Much that is regarded as standard literature could
undoubtedly be caught.
That is the Chief Justice's opinion about section 4 of the Act. Sir,
my Resolution does not cover it at all. It is a very modest one. I
202 THE HON'BLE MR.
ask, is it possible to conceive of a condemnation of any measure more
restrained in its tone yet more emphatic in its reference ? A
law so dangerously comprehensive in its scope naturally needs many
safeguards for its proper working. The Government of India recognised
the necessity of such safeguards and wisely provided them. The Hon'ble
Mr. Sinha, late Law Member to the Government of India, speaking from
his place in this Council, speaking on behalf ol the Government of India,
referred to these safeguards in clear and explicit terms, I will read an
extract from his speech. He said : —
Ifc is of no use to attempt to convince us that it is a very drastic measure,
because we have put in all kinds of safeguards. I will mention another which my Hon'ble
friends seem to have forgotten iu their hasty perusal of the Bill. When the Local
Government makes the order of forfeiture the Bill provides that it must state or describe
the offending words, or articles, or pictures, or engravings^ or whatever it is, upon which it
bases its order. No making an order which is vague, which is indefinite No order
without allowing the man to know what he is being punished for, but a definite, order
stating the very words of the article or describing it as that which the man is being punished
for. Is that not a safeguard ? Apart from the Tribunal of Appeal, is it not a safeguard
to provide that a man will not have his security forfeited without being told exactly what
he has written that is taken exception to,
I think, Sir, there could not be a clearer exposition of the intentions
of the Government in regard to this matter, and I understand that Mr.
Siuha's speech on that occasion was endorsed whole-heartedly by the
then Viceroy, Lord Alinto. The question is whether these safeguards
have been effectually provided, whether the promises then made have
been redeemed. Let us examine the matter a little. Section 4 of the
Act lays down that when a Local Government has decided to forfeit any
deposit in respect of a printing press, it has to issue a a notice in writing
stating the grounds of the forfeiture — the words, signs, visible represen-
tations, to which exception is taken. Section 6 lays down that when
a deposit has been made and the Government decides again to forfeit
the deposit in consequence of the contravention of the terms of section
4, a notice is to be issued in writing again stating the grounds for the
forfeiture. This is as regards - printing presses. The same provisions
mutatis mutandis apply to newspapers. Therefore it comes to this, that
wherever a Local Government is invested with the right to forfeit a
newspaper or a printing press, the obligation is cast on the Government
to state the grounds for the forfeiture. But, Sir, unfortunately, all this is
annulled by the provisions of section 22 ; that at any rate is the opinion
of the High Court. It is necessary for me to read section 22. That
section declares : —
Every declaration of forfeiture purporting to be made under this Act, shall, as against
all persons, bo conclusive evidence that the forfeiture therein referred to has taken place,
and no proceeding purporting to be taken under this Act shall be called in question by any
Court, except the High Court on such application as aforesaid, and no civil or criminal
proceedings, except as provided by this Act, shall be instituted against any person for
anything done or in good faith intended to be done under this Act.
This is the opinion of the Chief Justice in regard to this section : —
The notification therefore appears to mo to be defective in a material particular and, but;
for section 22 of the Act, it would, in my opinion, be our duty to hold that there had been
no legal forfeiture,
That section, however, provides that every declaration purporting to be made under thia
Act shall, as against all persons, be conclusive evidence that the forfeiture therein referred
to has taken place. The result is that though I hold that the notification does not comply
with the provisions of the Act, still we are, in nay opinion, barred from questioning the
legality of tho forfeiture it purports to declare,
THE HON'BLE MR. BANARJEE. 203
Is ifc possible to hold in the face of this clear expression of opinion
that the safeguards which were promised by the Hon'ble Mr. Sinha
have been provided ? Be it observed that these pledges were given in
order to allay the great public excitement that was caused by the
enactment of so drastic a law as the Press Act. What was given with
the one hand is practically taken away with the other. This was not,
this could not have been, the intention of the Government of India, for
apart from its high-mindedness, and even its sternest critics must give
ifc credit for that, there is internal evidence to show the anxiety of the
Government o£ India to incorporate in the Act the declaration of Mr.
Siaha ; and section after section reproduces the safeguards promised by
him. But all of a sudden they are nullified by the provisions of section
22. It seems to me that there must have been some error, some
mistake in the drafting. I am confirmed in this view by an examination
of the Act. Section 17 gives the aggrieved party a right of appeal to
the High Court ; that however becomes nugatory and meaningless if the
aggrieved party is not furnished with materials on which the
High Court is to form its judgment, or the High Court is barred from
considering these materials for the purposes of reviewing the decision of
the executive authority concerned. It is preposterous to suppose that
the Act deliberately nullifies in one part what it has deliberately con-
ceded in another, or that it has thrown an impossible burden of proof
upon the aggrieved party. I will quote the opinion of the Hon'ble the
Chief Justice : —
The Advocate General has admitted, and I think very properly, that the pamphlet (that
is the ' Comrade ') is not seditious and does dot offend against any provision of the criminal
law of India. But he has contended, and rightly in my opinion, that the provisions of the
Press Act extend far beyond the criminal law ; and he has argued that the burden of proof,
is cast on the applicant, so that, however meritorious the pamphlet may be, still if the
applicant cannot establish the negative the Act requires, his application must fail,
And what is this negative ? It is not enough for the applicant to show that the words
of the pamphlet are not likely to bring into hatred or contempt any class or section of
His Majesty's subjects in British India, or that they have not a tendency in fact to bring
about that result. But he must go further, and show that it is impossible for them to have
that tendency either directly or indirectly, and whether by way of inference, suggestion,
allusion, metapnor or implication.
Well, Sir, it is impossible for any person to prove a "negative, and the
difficulty of the task is enhanced by the comprehensive nature of the
obligation of proof that is cast upon him.
The second part of my Resolution follows as a matter of course from
the first. It is no use placing materials before the High Court for a
review, if the High Court is debarred from considering these materials.
The High Court says that it is debarred. Therefore I submit that section
22 ought to be amended in order definitely to empower the
High Court to set aside any order not made in conformity with the
provisions of sections 4, 6, 9, 11 and 12. It may perhaps be held that
the first portion of the Resolution is a surplusage, that it is already the
law, and that therefore no amendment is necessary. If this contention
holds good, it constitutes an overwhelming argument in favour of the
amendment of section 22 in accordance with my suggestion. If it is
already provided in the Act that the ground of the forfeiture must be set
forth in the notes of forfeiture, you are bound to make the law operative
and to give it effect. Therefore you must modify section 22 upon the
lines suggested by me.
203f THE HON'BLE MALIK UMAR HTAT KHAN.
Sir, it is admitted on all hands that there has been a sensible
improvement in the situation ; the highest authorities in the realm have
borne testimony to this effect, It is also admitted that there has been a
change for the better in the tone and temper of the press. Our critics
hostile to our interests and aspirations have ungrudgingly admitted the
fact ; that being so, I feel that I should be justified in demanding the
repeal or, at any rate, a substantial modifiction of the Act, but I go no
further thau to invite the Council so to amend the Act as to remove a
just cause for complaint, to carry out its declared intention and to redeem
the pledged word of the Ofovermnent. In making this appeal 1 speak not
only as a Member of this Council but as one with whom journalism has
been the cherished vocation of his life. We journalists feel as if the sword
of Damocles was hanging over our heads. We may be right or we may
be wrong, but that is our feeling. Ours is a noble calling and we are
entitled to the whole-hearted support and sympathy of the Government.
The newspaper press is the great organ for the ventilation of popular
grievance?, it is the safety valve of the State, it is an instrument of popular
and political education, it is the gift of British rule and we cherish it with
affectionate ardour. Its liberty may degenerate into licence, but I venture
to hold that the arm of the law, such as it is without being reinforced
by the Press Act, is long enough to reach it and strong enough to deal
with it. The amendment of the Press Act which I pray for — and after
all it is not an amendment but is in entire conformity with the intentions
of the framers of the Act — will, if accepted, go some way to soften the
rigours of the law and remove a just source of anxiety and of uneasiness
felt by the great body of Indian journalists, and above all, Sir, it will
proclaim to the world the unalterable determination of the Government
to redeem its pledged word and to make justice to the aggrieved party the
keynote of its policy, even when enforcing a measure of some severity,
deemed necessary by the Government in the supreme interests of the
State.
With these words, Sir, I beg to move the Resolution that stands
against my name, namely : —
That this Council recommends to the Governor General in Council that an amendment
of the Press Act of 1910 be introduced in the Imperial Legislative Council so as to provide
that when any order of forfeiture is made under the Act, the order must state or describe the
offending words or articles or pictures or engravings or whatever it is upon which the
Local Government bases its order, and that section 22 of the Act be so modified as to
definitely empower the High Court to set aside an order of forfeiture not made in conformity
with the provisions of sections 4, 6, 9, 11 and 12 of the Act.
The Hon'ble Malik TTmar Hyat Khan :— Sir, I am the greatest
enemy of the seditious Press and had I had the power, I would have
never allowed this resolution to be moved and discussed here to-day,
or, I would have asked to move a counter-resolution for making the
Press Act more stringent than it is now. On the 6th instant, I spoke on
this subject and I also emphasised the necessity of making this law more
effective in my last year's Budget Speech when there were no signs of this
resolution being dicussed here. An unbridled Press is the greatest curse
of India, and there has never been a more appropriate and more useful
Act passed in this Council than the Press Act with the exception of two
others the Seditious Meetings Act and the Conspiracy Act — which
constitute its part and parcel and which are calculated to strike a blow
at and suppress anarchism and seditious propaganda organised or
noa organised. I think that it is the seditious Press which lies at the root
TiiE HON'BLE MALIK UMAR HYAT KHAK. 205
of the other two. It is papers or other seditious pamphlets which poison
unsteady persons and result in engendering* in their minds either
conspiracy or an uncontrollable excitement. I need hardly mention the
history of the time when the late lamented Sir Herbert Rislev made his
masterly speech enumerating various anarchical deeds which " were com-
mitted, showing thereby urgent necessity of a new remedy against the
outbreak of crime which had then taken place. There has not been a
single discussion in this reformed Couucil on this subject in which I have
not taken part because I feel that if such propaganda are not crushed with
a strong hand serious danger will result in . the future. If anything
happens then on a very big scale the peace-loving subjects of His
Majesty the King-Emperor would be the real sufferers and the irresponsible
small set of sedition -mongers would gain money by setting the house of
the poor on fire and witnessing the blaze from afar. I think this crime
of seditious writing is far more serious than murder because in the former
one kills another for personal grievances while in the latter there is danger
of thousands of innocent men being killed who meant no harm to any one.
Sedition is sure to set back not only the hands of the clock of advancement
in India but it will so shatter the whole machinery as to break it in small
bits. One of the political prisoners in Montgomery Jail was asked why
he committed the crime, He replied that his mind was upset by reading
articles in newspapers and pamphlets which led him to do this. When he
was in prison and the whole thing over he had no motive for saying any-
thing but truth and we can safely hold the press responsible for 97 per cent,
of crimes of this nature. We, the representatives of the Punjab, who
come from martial classes by which the Punjab is mostly populated and
from which a large number of His Majesty's soldiers are drawn, cannot
possibly tolerate any weakness in the press as it will be allowing fire to be
fit near a tank of petroleum which may be in the house we reside in.
It may have been noticed that our worthy Lieutenant-Grovernor when
opening the Council specially remarked about the mischief caused by
presses of a certain class, and I am very glad to find that some steps were
taken against some newspapers. Although the Punjab Government have
determined to put a stop to such presses, yet there has been very little
done in view of the leniency of the Press Act as it isJLn the present form.
It hardly stands to reason that the Local Grovernnient should have to
decide upon specific offending words or articles, etc., as laid down in the
resolution which are seditious. There are many papers in which even one
article cannot be determined upon to be seditious. It is the general tone
pervading the pape* throughout the year which is really responsible for
influencing the trend of the mind of its readers against the authorities
organised for the establishment of law and order to which we owe all the
present progress which would further increase — were all obstacles such as
the seditious press removed from the way; and, in my opinion, the declara-
tion made by any Local Government of forfeiture of anything of a seditious
kind should be conclusive. I have been advocating this cause ever since
I had a v<j:;:e. I first spoke in the Punjab Council before the present law
was passed and again in the Imperial Council on various dates, as strongly
as words could permit me. I cannot believe any one the real friend of
India who exposes the poor peace-loving population, the lambs of India, to
the attacks of the wolye^ of the Press.
Let us now turn to the other aspect of the question. Has the situa-
tion since been improved ? The answer is surely and certainly in the
206 THE HON'BLE MAHARAJA RANAJIT SINHA OF NASHIPTJR.
negative. The period covering about a year's time, from the Delhi
outrage to a recent occurrence at a police station in Bengal, is closely linked
together by a series of occurrences, and goes to show that no leniency is
required in any way at the present juncture. To show weakness at a time
when force is demanded wotild be disastrous and unsound policy. I think
the Press Act as it now stands, is so weak as to be ineffective and unless the
general tone of a paper is considered in determining its real character no
satisfactory result would be achieved in the direction of repressing and
stamping out crime. It will have beeu seen how the freinds of India were
anxious to assist the Government in adequately coping with this wave of
undesirable and obnoxious crime when the Conspiracy Bill was put to the
vote. Tl'he whole Council, official, and non- official, were on one side while
the Hon'ble Mover of to-day with one faithful follower adhered like heroes
to fight to the last when the position was really untenable. I -not only
oppose this resolution as strongly as it lies in my power, but appeal to the
Council that no leniency - should be shown by the supreme Council
to the disturbers of India's peace. I take this opportunity to urge the
Governor-General in Council to make the Press law more stringent and
thus more effective. With these few remarks I oppose this resolution.
Sir, I think in every province the Lieufcenant-Governor or Local
Government is about the highest authority that there is, and perhaps an
editor or any one who writes an article in a newspaper is not even known to
him. It is not possible that he would go against the writer unless he finds
that he is so dangerous that he is disturbing the peace of the peace-loving
population in that province, and we cannot for a moment think that any
injustice would be done. The High Court is no doubt a very big court
but at the same time the Lieutenant- Governor of a province is not an
ordinary authority, and as he knows about the executive as well as the
other side, I think ha ought to be the highest authority in the province.
The Hoa'ble Maharaja Ranajit Sinha of Nashipur :— Sir, we all
know under what circumstances the Government had recourse to such a
piece of legislation as this in 1910. Mr. Sinha, who was the Law
Member then, explained the object for which the Government forced to
bring forward this law and he also explained the situation then existing
which necessitated the introduction of the Press Law which the country
opposed very much at the time. Sir, I am not in a position to say that
the circumstances have so materially changed that we can safely demand,
that the law shouid be repealed at this moment. We all, specially I,
coining from Bengal, cannot say that the circumstancef under which this
law had to be enacted no longer exist. I think it is not at all safe that
the Government should be divested of the powers of complete control
over irresponsible writings of the press, I should also think that, as
in this country the majority of the people form their opinion upon the
writings of the newspapers, so the greatest responsibility lies upon the
editors, and if they fail to discharge those duties, the Government should
have power to put a stop to those writings.
At the same time, Sir, I find that my friend does not wish that the law
shall be repealed, but he asks for an amendment of certain sections.
Under the Act itself the Government, in ordering forfeiture of deposits,
is to state and describe the offending words, or articles, or pictures, or
whatever it is, upon which the Local Government bases its order of
THE HON'RLE MR. QUMRUL IIUI>A. 207
forfeiture. The law already provides for this point and I do not see any
reason why an amendment is necessary on that point, but my friend has
explained that the Calcutta High Court has ruled that they are debarred
from questioning the legality of the order of the Local Government on
the point. If such be the case, I think the ambiguity should be removed
by an amendment.
With these few words I beg to support only the latter part of the
Resolution of my hon'ble friend on the right.
Ifo. Qumrul Hilda :— Sir? it must be in the recollection
of some of us present here that the Press Bill of 1910 was passed into law
under peculiar circumstances. There was agitation in some of the impor-
tant Provinces of India, and the Press Bill has created a sort of commotion
and agitation over the Bill itself within the walls of the Council Chamber.
After reading the report of the speeches of that memorable debate on the
Bill, one cannot fail to notice that the Government was not unaffected by
these agitations. It should be enough to prove the state of mind of the
Government that they thought proper to push through the Council and
to pass such an important Bill into law within three days. No case was
made out for this post haste procedure. Persons possessed with the
highest intellect and firmness of mind are liable to lose balance of reason-
ing when they are in hot haste. With due respect to Sir Herbert Risley,
the Honourable Member in charge of the Bill, I may be permitted to say
that even a man of his calibre could not prove himself an exception, His
chief object appeared to be very careful of the bargain he was making on
behalf of the Government. He knew for certain what precious privileges
he was taking from the people of India, but he did not seem to care for
the words of his promises which he offered to them instead. He was fully
aware of the fact that the Press Bill would not leave an atom- of the free-
dom of Press to the people, and so he asked them to console themselves
with the check provided in the Bill on the powers of the Local Govern-
ments. This check consisted of the right of appeal to the High Court
against the order of Local Governments. He assured them of their right
of appeal in these words : —
So far I have dealt only with the powers of the Act. I will now turn to the check I have
provided. This consists of an appeal to a special tribunal of three Judges of the H
against any order of forfeiture passed by the Government. If it appears to the High Court
that the matter m respect of which the order was passed does not come within th« terras of
section 4 of the Bill, then the High Court will set aside the order of forfeiture.
will be admitted that this is a very complete check upon any hasty or improper action by
a Local Government, We have therefore barred all other legal remedies.
It is not difficult to guess that while Sir Herbert was uttering these
words he had in his mind sections 18 and 22 of the Press Act. Then this
sacred assurance and promise of complete check was endorsed and support-
ed by the Hon'ble Law Member of the time. We believed in, and relied
fully and completely on, the words of the responsible officers of the Crown.
But when the first appeal under the Act goes to the High Court of Cal-
cutta we, to our amazement and disappointment, are told that the complete
check promised to us and provided in the Act are words without meaning.
I need not quote the jadgment of the Chief Justice of Bengal, as I presume
that his interpertation of the law on the subject must be fresh in the minds
of the majority of us in this Council, and some portions of it have just
been read to us by the Hon'ble mover of the Resolution. This ruling of
208 THE HON'BLE MR. BAMARAYANINGAR.
the High Court should convince the Government as well, that the check
it had placed on tbe hasty action of the Local Government, proved * futile '
instead of being complete as it was contemplated at the time of passing
the Act. The Resolution we are discussing is nothing but a request to
the Government to rectify its unintentional error in an Act which was
passed in a hurry and under peculiar circumstances. Sir, pray do not
give any one ground to think that the Government can err, that it does
not possess courage enough to mend that error. Let it not come into the
minds of the poDple that the Government in its assurances and promises
plays upon words.
Sir, we cannot for a moment suppose that the Government ever says
nothing to the people it does not mean. When we ask for an amendment
of this Press Act, we demand that on the strength of the weighty words
of Sir Herbert Risley. It was expected of the Government to come
forward ere long, with a Bill to amend the Press Act of 1910. Sir,
it was a matter of honour for the Government.
I think that both the people as well as the Government should be
thankful to the Hoti'ble Babu Surendra Nath Banerjee for moving this
Resolution in the Council. It may remove the grievance of the people,
and it has given a chance to the Government to extricate itself from the
awkward position it has bean placed in. For my own part, while thank-
ing my EJon'ble friend for this Resolution, I cannot help tailing him
that the scope of it is too limited to remove many other flaws in the
Act, With these few remarks I strongly support the Resolution.
The Hon'ble Mr JEfcaun Ra,yanin£ar : -Sir, the request embodied
in the Resolution appears to be modest and reasonable. If the request
were for a repeal of the Press Act, many of us would have no hesitation,
in saying that it is not yet time for such a request. But, as I under-
stand, the request is to amend the law and to give effect to the express
intention of Government. Sir, in the proceedings of this Council relat-
ing to the the enactment of the Press Law, there is the statement of the
then Hon'ble Home Member in charge of the Bill assuring the Council
that provision is made in the Act for the right . of appeal to the High
Court when the order of the Government passed against the accused
contravenes section 4 of the Act. The provision in the Act for the
appeal, in order to be effective as a safeguard, will have to be modified
by the amendment now proposed. Hon'ble Members are aware of what
the Calcutta High Court said recently in disposing of Mohammed Ali's
appeal. In this case, in spite of the fact that there is in the Act provi-
sion for the right of appeal, the High Court could not interfere with
the order passed by the Government and therefore the appeal had to be
dismissed. If the legislature really intended the provision to be effective
and the High Court interprets it otherwise, we have to presume that
there is some defect in the wording of the Act. And it is proper that
this defect should be remedied by an amendment. Of course the defect
must have been the result of some mistake. Government, I am sure,
will not persist in the mistake when the mistake is pointed but. Per-
sistence in mistake is against the principles of good government and
assuredly it is against the enlightened policy of our benign Government.
Sir, I therefore support the Resolution and hope that Government will
see their way to modify the wording of the Act so as to bring the law
THE HON'BLE MR DAS. 209
into conformity with the intention as expressed by Sir Herbert Risley
in that masterly speech which my friend the Hon'ble Malik (Imar Hyat
Khan, has just referred to.
ThO Son'We MT- Das :— Sir, the Resolution before the Council seeks
an amendment oi: the Press Act of 1910. That Act was passed under
peculiar circumstances. The readings of the political barometer at the
time made it necessary. As to whether an amendment is necessary now
or not is really the question before the Council. At the time when the
Act was passed, the conditions which necessitated the passing of the Acb
were considered extraordinary, they were considered unusual. An unusual
state of things demanded a peculiar piece of legislation suited to the time.
The figures cited by the Mover of the Resolution show that Govern-
ment have found it necessary almost every day to exercise the powers
reserved to Government unler the Act with regard to newspapers only,
for the Mover said that he had taken notice of 800 cases within a certain
period, which on striking their average, gives more than one case per
day. If that be the real state of things, what was considered an abnormal
and unusual state of things at the time the Press Act was passed is now
actually a normal state of things. On that ground, Sir, I think an
amendment of the Act is necessary. If that be the right view, a thing
which was considered usual at the time has developed into an evil which
is to be per man ant amongst us. So an amendment of the Act is neces-
sary on that ground,
The flon'ble gentleman who rose immediately after the Mover had
sat down, said that he would rather seek an amendment in order to
make the provisions of the Act more stringent. Sir, on both sides the
necessity of an amendment has been pressed. What really strikes one
as a very difficult question — and yet it is a question in which the public
are very much interested — is this, namely/whether the Act has been
worded so as to give the people an idea as to what it is that is expected
of them. The Act was interpreted by the learned Chief Justice of the
Calcutta High Court in the case to which refernce has been made by the
Hon'ble Mover, and the Chief Justice pronounced it as full of ambiguities.
I am very glad indeed that the learned Advocate-GreneralJ who
represented the views of the Crown in that particuler case, is present here.
I mean the case of Mr Mahomed AH with regard to the publication of the
panphlet" Come over to Macedonia and help us" — that was the
pamphlet which Was being interpreted and discussed before the Chief
Justisce at the time. The learned Advocate-General then contended, and
I have no doubt that his contention represents the views of Government. I
have his words here — ' the High Court 's power of intervertion is the
narrowest; its power to pronounce on the legality of the forfeiture by reason
of failure to observe the mandatory conditions of the Act is barred.' These
are the words which I find in that judgment of the learned Chief Justice
that even in illegalities by reason of failure to observe the mandatory
conditions of the Act the High Court's powers are barred.
Sir, I have always understood that the mandatory condition of an Acfc,
especially when the conditions are conditions precedent to any action, or to
any measure, or to any procedure, are a sine qua non to the validity and
legality of what follows. But here we have a case where the mandatory
conditions have beeu differently interpreted.
210 THE HON'BLE Mfc, DAS,
1 1 is admitted that there are conditions of a mandatory character, and yet
it is contended that the High Court's power to pronounce on the legality
of the forfeiture, by reason of the failure to observe the mandatory
conditons ot tbe Act is barred. If they are to be all mandatory
conditions, certainly they must be tested by those rules and canons of
interpretation which have always been held to be applicable to mandatory
conditions in all civilised countries. If we remove from the Act the
mandatory condition (let us suppose for a moment that the mandatory
conditions are remo?ed) how does the Act stand ? The Government's
power is defined in section 4 as — ' whenever any printing press is used lor the
purpose of printing or publishing any newspaper, book or other document,
containing any words, signs or visible representations which are likely or
may have a tendency directly or indirectly ' and so on, 'notice is given to
the keeper of such printing press stating or describing the words, signs or
visible representations which in its opinion are of the nature described
above.' Words to a similar effect recur in sections 9, 10 and 11. These
words (if the mandatory conditions be omitted) will not find any place in
the Act. What is left in the Act is the power of the Executive Government
to order a forfeiture, and that power certainly is of an executive character.
No doubt it is absolutely necessary that an Executive Government should
possess powers which should stand beyond the power of a judicial court
to criticise. • If I remember aright the Learned Chief Justice in that very
judgment says that the Executive Government may receive information
from other sources than are open to the law Courts: and the Executive
Government may be influenced by considerations which do not weigh at
all before a High Court. It is quite open to the Executive Government to
exercise its executive powers — such powers as it deems necessary for the
better administration cf the country, for the peace of the country and the
preservation of law and order in the country. But at the same time when
the Executive Government comes to the Legislative Council and introduces
apiece of legislation with a view to arming itself with a power through the
instrumentality of the Legislature, certainly that Act which gives the Exe-
cutive Government its power must be interpreted according to the known
rules and canons of interpretation which have been the result of ages of
judicial decisions. The executive power of the Government in this case
has been derived from a piece of legislation. It was quite open to the
Government to exercise its power, such as it thought the conditions of the
country demanded, without coining to the Legislative Council ; but
when the Executive Government, which takes the initiative in every
piece of legislation, comes to the Legislative Department, and takes its
arms from the armoury of legislature then certainly the provisions of
the Act which arms the Government with the power must be interpreted
according to accepted rules of interpretation and construction. Here
we have a piece of legislation where power is given to the High Court to
test the legality of an order issued by the Executive Government, and
yet we find the Advocate General contending before the High Court that
the power of the High Court to pronounce upon the legality of the for-
feiture, by reason of the failure to observe the mandatory conditions of
the Act, is barred. I know there have been conflicting decisions on this
point in the different High Courts, as to whether the High Court has
power or not to pronounce on the legality of the action of the Executive
Governmeut under this Act. If there has been any conflict of decision,
I should say that is an additional reason for an amendment of the Act.
THE HON'BLE THE VICE-PRESIDENT AND THE HON'BLE MR. KENRICK. 211
As to what should be the line of amendment it is not for me to surest
If the Government thinks that it would be justified to reserve toltself
absolute power —
Hon"ble tJie Vice-President :-I must ask the Hon'ble Member
to resume his seat as he has exceeded his time limit.
The Eon'tte Mr. Keariok :-Sir, as a member of the Select Commit-
tee o • the press legislation of 1910, and as one who has had some practi-
cal experience of the working of the Press Act, I desire to offer a few
observations in opposition to this Resolution. Every one acquainted with
the provisions of the Act must admit of course, that the Act has placed _
and advisedly placed — an extremely effective and powerful weapon in
the hands of the executive. But those who are best informed are aware
that this weapon has been wielded, and invariably wielded, with extreme
moderation by the Executive in the many cases in which there has been
unhappy necessity for using it. During the past four years since the
Act has been in force, as was mentioned by the Hon'ble Mover, some 800
publications have been dealt with under the provisions of the Act. But
the number of forfeitures — the number of cases in which forfeitures
occurred — was comparatively few.
I may say that many, if not nearly all, of the cases in which publica-
tions were forfeited under the provisions of the Act were cases in which
the writings were of the most flagrantly revolutionary nature, and it
would, at any rate in my view, have been deplorable indeed if the law
did not provide some summary and effective means of dealing with such
literature.
The most complete answer to the proposed resolution for the amend-
ment of the Act is the fact that dnring the whole period in which the
Act has been in force for very nearly 4 years — 3 years and 10 months
as a matter of fact — during the whole of that period and with all the
cases in which publications hare been forfeited, which have come before
the executive authorities and which have been dealt with by them under
the Act, only one case (and that is the one to which the Hon'ble
Mover has alluded) has been brought up before any of the High Courts in
India so far as I am aware, and in that case the validity of the forfeiture
was supported.
The Hon'ble Mover has urged, no doubt with the best of faith and
in the sincerest belief, that the promises of safeguards made by the
Hon'ble Mr. Sinha on behalf of the Government when introducing the
Bill have not been fulfilled. But the Hon'ble Mover is, as I shall show,
mistaken in that respect. It is a fallacious and wholly misleading argu-
ment to quote words which were used by the Hon'bJe Mr. Sinha when
discussing sections of the Act relating to the forfeiture of a printing press
and to the forfeiture of security given by the owner of a press; I say
that it is misleading and fallacious to quote those words and to divorce
them from their context and impute them to Mr. Sinha as being spoken
by him in reference to a different section. By a different section I refer
to section 12 which has a different scope, a different object, and a different
subject-matter from those sections relating to the forfeiture of the press
and forfeiture of security in relation to which the words were spoken.
212 THE HO.VBLE MB. BANARJEE AND THE UoNW Mfi. KENBICK,
Yet that has been the argument presented to this Council by the Hon'ble
Mover Upon those false premises the charge has been levelled by the
Hon ble Mover against the Government that they have failed to fulfil
Sinha ^ then made on behalf of th^ Government by the
The Son*Mo Mr. Banerjee :-l rise to a point of order. 1 never
charged the Government with having failed to fulfil their promises. What
I said was that there was an en or in the matter of drafting and I submit
that is very different and I beg that the Hon'ble Member will withdraw
that remark.
The Eon'ble Mr- Eenrick J-The Hon'ble Mover used the expres-
sion that ' the Government have failed to fulfil their pledges.
The Son'Ue Mr Banerjee •— Yes; but the Hon'ble Member if you
•will permit me, Sir, has done exactly what he charges me with having
done in respect of Mr. Sinha, divorcing the whole context from that
particular passage. The whole trend of my argument was that a mistake
had been committed, and he must not pick out a particular sentence or a
particular part of my speech and say that I meant to charge the Govern-
ment with deliberately breaking its promise.
The Vioe-President :— Mr. Kenrick is in order and will continue his
speech.
The Hcn"ble Mr- Kenriok :— I say that the Hon'ble Mover did more
than suggest, he asserted that the Government had failed to redeem
the pledges given on their behalf by the Hon'ble Mr. Sinha in his speech
in Council. I say that that charge is without foundation. The safeguards
which were promised were incorporated in the Act.
The proposed resolution asks for legislation to amend the Act by provid-
ing that ' when any order of forfeiture is made under the Act, the order must
state or describe the offending words, or articles, or pictures, or engravings,
or whatever it is, upon which the Local Government bases its order.' That
is the first portion of the proposed amendment. But the safeguard which
is there asked for is in fact already provided by certain sections of
the Act, particularly by section 6 in the case of forfeiture of further
security deposited by the proprietor of a press ; also in the case of forfeiture
of a printing press, and in the case of forfeiture of any publication where
further security has has been deposited under section 5. In all those
cases, section 6 of the Act requires notice to be given in writing, stating
the words, signs or visible representations which are held to offend
against section 4. Now, those are the safeguards which were specifically
referred to by the Hon'ble Mr. Sinha in his speech in Council, and those
safeguards have been provided. Precisely similar provisions have been
inserted in sections 9 and 11 in cases where the Local Government
exercises the power to declare the security deposited by a newspaper
publisher forfeited, and also in cases of forfeiture of further security
deposited on making a fresh declaration under the Press and Registration
of Books Act, 18G7. So that in all these various sections, what is now
asked for in the proposed amendment is already law. I would ask
Hon'ble Mfinbt-rs to realise and recollect that,
tTHE HON'BLti MR, KENRICK. 213
There only remains for consideration section 12 of the Act, which
presumably was the one to which the Hon'ble Member has directed his
attention in the remarks which he addressed to the Council. That, as I
have already said, is a section which was passed with a different object,
and it contains different subject-matter from that of the preceeding
sections. Section 12, I would point out to Hon'ble Members who happily
are not acquainted in detail with the provisions of this Act, is not con-
cerned in any way with any particular press or with any particular
newspapers publishers or with the security given by any owner of a press.
This section, section 12, gives power to order forfeiture of publications
offending against section 4 wherever those publications are found. The
provisions of section 12 meet the case of publications coming into India
from abroad, and not only such publications, but publications wherever
found the sources of which may be entirely unknown. The object of
section 12 is to give power at once to deal with such matter of mischievous
and evil tendency; and it follows that section 12 was advisedly drafted
differently from the preceding sections. I may say, from my recollection
of the debate on this Bill in 1910, that this section 12 — and I should like
to be corrected if I am in error, though my recollection is very clear — was
passed without any resolution for amendment being proposed and
without any division thereon. That is an important point to be considered
and to be kept in mind, and this notwithstanding the fact that Hon'ble
Members at the time were fully cognisant that this section differed in
language and in the safeguards provided from those sections which were
dealing with the forfeiture of a press or the forfeiture of a security given
by a newspaper printer or publisher. Section 12 differs from the other
sections by merely requiring the Government when forfeiting any publica-
tion to notify the grounds of opinion that the publication contains words
or signs of the nature described in section 4.
Section 4 contains six clauses which prescribe the various grounds on
which a publication may be forfeited. These clauses consist of several
sub-heads and if the section is carefully read and analysed it will be seeu
that there are some thirty grounds on which a publication by means of its
criminal and mischievous tendencies may be forfeited, Now, the Govern-
ment in exercising their power of forfeiture under section 12, has always
notified the particular ground in respect of which the matter comes
within the section. In the notification of forfeiture of a particular
pamphlet or paper it is invariably stated in respect of which particular
ground of these thirty in the opinion of the Local Government the docu-
ment offends. I say that to go further in cases under section 12 and
actually to state or describe the offending words or articles in a public
notification by Government, and that is] what the Hon'ble Mover has
urged upon the Council should be done — to state the actual words
•which formed the subject-matter of the forfeiture, would be merely to
emphasize, to extend, to spread broadcast and perpetuate the very evil
which section 12 is designed to suppress. It is intended as a summary
means, an effective means, of suppressing offensive matter, and when I
use the word ' offensive ' I use it in the sense of matter which offends
against the provisions of section 4, which, as I have said, are com-
prehensive.
Now, as to the quotations from the judgment of the Hon'ble and
learned Chief Justice of Bengal, while according it the highest respect, 1
THE HON'BLE RAI SRI RAM BAHADTJE.
an entitled to say that in so far as the Chief Justice has gone beyond the
facts of the particular case that he was deciding his remarks amount to
mere obiter dicta. The decision on the case amounts to this, that
the forfeiture in the particular instance which was submitted to the
Court was valid in law. Anyone whose misfortune it was to exa-
mine the proscribed pamphlet in that case, with its gruesome and
revolting illustrations, could not have any doubt that the power of
forfeiture vested in the Executive was, in that particular instance, pro-
perly and wisely exercised in the public interest. Notwithstanding that
judgment and its dicta, I have no hesitation in expressing this opinion,
and I do so with a full sense of responsibility : I say that if for the purpose
of argument we assume in any individual instance an arbitrary exercise
by the Executive of the powers vested in them by the forfeiture of a
publication which all reasonable men would agree in holding to be
innocuous, innocent, free from any mischievous tendency, on that
assumption and in sucli a case, the special Bench of the High Court
would have full power under section 19 to hold that the publication did
not come within the provisions of section 4. I say without doubt that
the Conrt would set aside, and properly set aside, the forfeiture. The
provisions contained in section 19 of the Act, therefore, do contain reason-
able protection against any arbitrary act of forfeiture under section 12
by the Executive. That no advantage has been taken of these provisions
except in one case, and then unsuccessfully, demonstrates the absence of
any arbitrary action on the part of the Executive.
For these reasons I confidently ask the Council to show by their votes
that they regard the Press Act as a beneficial measure and one necessary
in the public interests, as necessary now as it was at the time it was
passed. I further ask Hon'ble Members to refuse to impair its practical
value by any modification of its salutary provisions.
The Hon'We Rai Sri Earn Bahadur :— Sir, the motion before the
Council is not for the removal of the Press Act from the Indian Statute-
book. The motion made by the Hon'ble Mr. Banerjee is simply
this, that in the judgment given by the High Court of Bengal in the case
of Mr. Mahomed AH section 22 of the Act has been interpreted in such a
way as to weaken the safeguards provided in sections 4, 6, 9 and 11.
These sections lay down that if in the opinion of the Local Government
the forfeiture of the security or of the press appears necessary, then the
notice which is to be given in writing must state or describe the particular
words, signs, or visible representations. In other words, Sir, the grounds
must be given on which the opinion of the Government is based. Section
22, as interpreted by the learned Chiet Justice of Bengal, would not
make the statement of the grounds on which the opinion is based
mandatory ; but to use his own words, ' a repetition of an opinion cannot
be the grounds on which that opinion is based.' The object of the pro-
posed amendment in that section 22 should be so modified as to be in
conformity with the provisions of the preceding sections inserted to serve
as safeguards, and, not to allow ,of the exercise of the powers given
under the Act in an arbitrary way. The first portion of section 22
regarding which this Resolution is moved runs thus : —
Every declaration of forfeiture purporting to be made under this Act sha1!, as against
all persons, be conclusive evidence that the forfeiture therein referred to has taken plnce.
That is the only point which has to be taken into consideration. The
preceding sections prescribe th<*t there should be a written notice by
THE HONBLE KHAN BAHADUR MIR ASAD ALT KHAN. fiJ5
the Government, and clearly lay down that that notice should state or
describe the signs, words and visible representations which are considered
objectionable by the Government. These sections" would imply that the
notice without such statement or description is incomplete and that their
omission does not fulfil the conditions laid down in the Act. I think,
therefore that the Resolution which my Hon'ble friend has moved, and
especially its second part, is a sound one; and by amending the Act the
Government would place section 22 in conformity with the preceding
sections laying down necessary safeguards.
With these words, Sir, I support the Resolution.
The Hon'ble Elian Bahadur Mir Asad All Khan :— Sir, the re-
solution before the House is a very important one. It concerns not one
particular class but all classes of the Indian community. It neither
asks for the repeal of the Press Act, nor attempts to introduce radical
changes into the Act. The Hon'ble Mr. Banerjee makes but a modest
request, and that, I suppose, in the light of a recent judgment of the
Calcutta High Court. The first part of the resolution requires a clear
statement or description of the offending words or articles or signs or
visible representations within the meaning of the law, in all cases of
forfeiture, and the second part requires a modification of the section 22
of the Press Act, so as to give real and dt finite powers to the High
Court in deaang with forfeiture proceedings. Though certain sections of
the Act provide in the earlier stages of forfeiture and before the applica-
tion to the High Court that the Government should state or describe the
offending words or signs or representations, one of the most important
sections, namely, section 12, does not contain such a provision. In the
absence of a statement or description of the offending words and even of
a statement of the grounds that led to an action of forfeiture, no
judicial authority, however high and competent it be can pronounce a
judgment. The public are entitled to know the exact nature of the offence,
when an order of forfeiture is made. Though section 12 provides that
the Government should state the grounds of its opinion, it is rather
strange and unfortunate that in a recent well-known case it has failed to
do so. Referring to this obvious omission, the learned Chief Justice of
Bengal observed in one of his judgments, the notification therefore appears
to me to be defective in a material particular and but for section 22 of the
Act it would, in my opinion, be our duty to hold that there had been no
legal forfeiture.' If the offending words or signs or representations were
stated or described, the Judges would have at least known the grounds of
the action of the Executive. The observation of the Chief Justice
brings me to the second part of the resolution, which is even more
important than the fir>t part. Elsewhere in his judgment, the Chief Justice
says : ' Together with this section (meaning thereby section 12) must
be read section 22 by which with a qualified exception in favour of the
High Court, all jurisdiction is in effect barred. ' After this frank
pronouncement by the highest judicial authority in the land, need it be said
that the Press Act should forthwith be modified, -so as to empower the
High Court to deal with press prosecutions in an effective manner. But
the Act, as it stands at present, is an instrument of unduly great power in
the hands of ihe Executive, so much so that it makes the highest judicial
tribunal feel their utter helplessness in the matter. Hence such small
modifications in essential particulars as the Hou'ble Mr. Banerjee suggests
216 THE HON'BLE RAJA KUSHAL P!L SINGH AND THE HON, MB. v, n. PANDIT,
will bring the Act in conformity with the* liberal principles of our
Goversment. The exciting and critical times that demanded a stringent
law are happily gone by, and the present peaceful times no longer require
such a rigorous Press Act. It is perhaps not fully known how Tittle is the
operation of the present Act calculated to promote the free giowth of an
independent public opinion. With these words I heartily support the
resolution, and trust that it will meet with the acceptance of this
Council.
The Hon'blO Raja Kuslial Pal Singh :— Sir, after the very able
and exhaustive treatment which the subject matter of this resolution has
received at the hands of the Hon'ble mover, I do not think I shall be
justified in wasting the time of the Hon'ble Council by repeating what has
already been stated by him. But the resolution is of such vital impor-
tance that I cannot give a silent vote in its favour. When the Press Bill
was introduced into the Supreme Legislative Council, the country was
assured by the then Law Member (Mr. S P. Sinha) and Sir Herbert
Risley that sufficient safeguards were provided in the Act to prevent an
arbitrary exercise of authority by Local Governments. This assurance,
however, falls to the ground under the interpretation put upon the Act
by the special Bench of the Calcutta High Court ; and a situation has
arisen which calls for the amendment of the Act on the lines suggested
in the Resolution before the Council If the two checks against arbitrary
action by Local Governments were intended to be introduced into the Act,
and if it is now found that the checks furnished have proved utterly
abortive it clearly behoves Government to take measures to revise the Act
and bring it in conformity with the true purpose and intention of
the Legislature. I think there ought to be no difficulty in amending
the Act in such a manner as to make effectual the checks intended to be
furnished, but not furnished, as a matter of fact, in the Press Act. With
these few words I beg to support the resolution.
Hon'blO Mr V. 3& Pandit : — Sir, the discussion which has
proceeded upon the Resolution moved by the Hon'ble Mr. Banerjee has
gone off at a tangent. The basis of the Resolution of Mr. Banerjee has
been that there were assurances given in the course of the discussion thac
took place at the time that the Press Bill was passed into law in this
Council that safeguards had been introduced in every case, whereas it has
been found that those safeguards do not exist, and that, secondly, in
order that the fullest effect should be given to the promises made at the
time, such safeguards should now be introduced.
The question of importance in connection with the Press Act, which
was raised in the case decided by the Calcutta High Court, was really one
with regard to the very wide terms in which section 4 of the Act was
couched. It has been pointed out by the learned Advocate-General, who
sat upon the Select Committee of that Bill, that the terms of section 4
were advisedly made fully comprehensive. The Press Act was directed
against the malevolent activities of persons ill-disposed towards Govern-
ment, Law and Order, and in order to meet every form which those
malevolent writings intended for circulation through the agency of the
printing press might take, the Government had necessarily to secure
preventive and punitive powers in adequately wide terms. The evil
was undoubtedly rampant at the time and it was realised by all the
THE HON'BLE MR, v, R. PANDIT. 217
members who spoke on that occasion that, as it was an evil which it was
found necessary to meet, if due provision had to be made, it ought to be
made iu an effective manner. It is admitted on all hands that the
provision has been made in an effective* manner. It is true, as
was pointed out at the time by my predecessor in this seat, that
the wording of the Act threw the burden upon the person against
whom an order of forfeiture was passed of proving the negative,
namely, that the publication concerned did not come within section
4 of the Act, and it has been pointed out by the Calcutta High
Court that it is a burden almost verging on the impossible for any
person to discharge ; but that is all beside the point on the present
occasion. The Resolution does not concern itself with section 4 of the
Act, and I would deprecate on this occasion any discussion upon matters
which are not really covered by the terms of the Resolution. The main
point at present before the Council is that, although in certain sections
of the Act provision has been made that the Local Government1 in
forfeiting or passing an order in regard to forfeiture should state or
describe the words, signs, pictures or anything else which has been taken
exception to and which has led the Government to forfeit the Press- or
the newspaper. If the order does not specify these words, signs, or
pictures, there is no provision in the Act to make that order illegal
or liable to be set aside, for under the Press Act as it stands, the ouly
power which has been given to the High Court to set aside an order of
forfeiture is that contained in section 17 and 19 of the Act, and thao
power is confined only to the case where the High Court comes to tha
conclusion that the particular publication does not contain any words,
signs or other things which would bring it within section 4< of the Act.
Section 22 of the Act has been referred to in this connection as making
the order conclusive against all persons The main question which has
given rise to the controversy is one with regard to an order of forfeiture
passed under section 12 of the Act, and it has been pleaded in the course
of the discussion that the wording of section 12 of the Act is, or was
intended to be, uniform with that of section 6, 9 and other sections. As
a matter of fact there is a very important difference between the word-
ing of this section and the other sections, because in section 12 all that
it is necessary for the order to specify is the ground upon which the
opinion is based. This is different from the wording in the other sec-
tions, which require that the words, signs, or visible representations
should be stated or described, and where in the same enactment different
wording has been used, it is one of the accepted principles of construc-
tion that differences of intention must be ascribed and it must be held
that the difference has advisedly been made. Now with regard to
section 12, it has been laid down that — Where any newspaper, book or
other document, wherever printed, appears to the Local Government to
contain words, signs, or visible representations of the nature described
in section 4, sub-section (/), the Local Government may, by notification
in the Local official gazette, stating the grounds of its opinion, declare-
such newspaper, book or other document to be forfeited to His Majesty •
and thereupon any police officer may seize, and so on.
This therefore refers only to the newspaper or to the particular publi-
cation which has been ordered to be forfeited, and it is only fair to$ con-
clude that in connection with this section it was assumed that the injury
218 THE HOU'BLE MR. v. 6. PANDIT.
to be inflicted upon the particular person \vould be of an insignificant
character as compared with the injury that would be inflicted in. the
case of the forfeiture of a press or forfeiture of a security or of a news-
paper. This would only refer to a few cases and that would be in
connection with a few copies of the particular publication. The cases
that have ariesn have mostly been of this description. I do not think
that there have been many cases where any foifeiture of a press or
forfeiture of security has been ordered, and section 12 does not confine
itself only to publications by anonymous authors, and even where
action is taken under the section where the authorship is known or the
press which has published it is known, I suppose the Government has
been actuated rather by the desire of stopping the evil than by that of
causing an injury, which is peculiarly what is required in the particular
circumstances of the case. The Government in acting under section 12
would really be acting in a lenient manner in connection with cases
where the provisions of this Act have been transgressed. There is
however this to be said that every right of property deserves to be res-
pected. Whether it is only a few copies of books worth a hundred
rupees or so, or whether it is the security for Rs. 5,000 or Rs. 10,000, or
the press itself of considerable value, every person who owns property
is entitled to have the grounds definitely stated to him because the
provisions of this Act partake of the nature of a penal enactment. In
the simplest criminal case the accused is entitled to be informed as to
what the charge is against him, and similarly in a case like this I ven-
ture to think that justice requires that the person against whom an
order of forfeiture is pasjed ought to be informed as to what it is that is
taken exception to. No doubt it would be sometimes throwing a great
burden upon a Local Administration to require the Local Administration
te state all the extracts which have been objected to and show that it is
not merely upon a pervading impression but upon some particular
grounds that the Local Government is acting, and it should be quite
possible and quite easy for it to give those extracts upon which the
opinion is based which renders the publication liable to forfeiture.
It is on this ground and not on the ground of any promises made in
Council at the time when the enactment was passed that I support the
Resolution which has been brought forward to-day by Mr. Banerjee.
The speeches to which reference has been made, particularly that of the
Hon'ble Mr. Sinha, the late Law member, referred specially to the
provisions of the Bill as it then stood ; and by no stretch of language
can it be said that when referring to the safeguards provided under the
Bill, the Hon'ble Mr. Sinha was referring not only to sections 6 and 9
but also to section 12 of the Bill as it then stood. I find also that the
mere provision under section 12 of the Local Government being required
to state or to describe the words, signs, etc., would not be of much avail
because the Local Government having described any thing which it chose
to treat as being open to objection as falling under sectiou 2 of the Act,
there wonld be absolutely nothing in the Act to warrant any other higher
authority to object to that order and to set it aside, because under sec-
tion 17 the order can only be set aside if in the publication there is
absolutely nothing which conld come under section 4 cf the Act. The
Resolution therefore, I am very sorry to say, does not help materially
in improving the Act but it does help in drawing the attention of
the Government to this anomaly with regard to section 12, and it is
THE HON'BLE SIR REGINALD CRADDOCK, THE HON>BLE MR. BANERJEE 219
AND THE HONB'LE THE VICE-PRESIDENT.
from that point of view, in drawing the attention of the Government
to that anomaly, that I support the Resolution.
The Sortie Sir Reginald Craddook —Sir, the Hon'ble Mover of
this Resolution desires us to commend that the Press Act of 1910 ho
amended in such a way as to provide that when any order of forfeitun
is made under the Act, the order must state or describe the oflendinc*
words, etc, upon which the Local Government bases its orders He
also desires to amend section 22 so as to extend the powers of the'Hio-h
Court to set aside an order of forfeiture.
To some extent some of the previous speakers have explained whattho
Hon ble Mover did not make clear. He bases his proposals oa securing
a general simi arity of procedure under the Act without actually specifying
the section which would require to be amended to brino- about that
similarity. In effect the Hon'ble Member was urging that the procedure
when a newspaper, book or document is forfeited under 'section 12 shall
be similar to the procedure when a security or a press is forfeited that
is to say, that the wording used in section 12 should be assimilated 'to the
wording of sections 4, 6, 9 and 11, notwithstanding that section • 12 is
totally different from those sections and that the lan^ua^e used is quite
dissimilar. It has been made quite clear _
. Baaerjee:-Irise to a point of order, I do not
think I made that statement at all. I was trying to illustrate from the
various sections that in every section where the Government has the
power of confiscating a press or security, the obligation is also cast to
state the ground of that order.
The EoXL'Ue the Vioe-Presideat :— The Hon'ble Member wilt have
a chance of explaining his remarks in his reply, and it is undesirable to
interrupt speakers more than is absolutely necessary.
The Kon'ble Sir Reginald Craddock :— I was explaining what the
effect was of the amendments which are proposed by the Hon'ble Mover,
and the only way the object of his Resolution could be carried out would be
by the amendment of section 12, which section he did not specifically refer
to. But I would like to explain a little more the differences between these
sections. In the case of the four sections, 4, 6, 9 and 11, the keeper of
the press or the publisher ' of the newspaper is a known person. He is
a person whose valuable security or property is being forfeited. The
description of the words and illustration, etc., which are held to infringe
the law are communicated to him personally. In all these cases the order
is communicated with full particulars to the specific person concerned by
a special notice addressed to him and to nobody else, which notice is not
made public. He is the person responsible in law for the printing and
publication of the matter complained of, his property is being forfeited,
and the law therefore provides that he should be explicitly told exactly
what the Government had to complain of in his writings. Now in the
case of section 12 the order of forfeiture relates noi to a valuable
security nor to a press. What it relates to is the objectionable book or
document which will in many cases — in fact in most cases — be of most
220 THE HON'BLE SJR REGINALD
trivial value. It is notified publicly in the various Government Gazettes
and it is a notice to people at large warning them and all persons that may-
be concerned that a particular book or particular pamphlet has been
prescribed* It is designed primarily, as the Hon'ble Mover of the Bill,
Sir Herbert Risley, said, to deal with cases of literature either printed
abroad and over which the Government has no control, or printed secretly
in India, the printers or publishers being unknown. It may of course be
used in respect of publications when the printer or publisher is known, but
in such cases neither the security nor the press has been forfeited and the
mere forfeiture of the document itself would come under one of the minor
penalties of the Act. Now the reason for this difference which I have
explained, the difference between section 12 and the difference between
the other sections was very marked, and I am sure no person of ordinary
prudence would recommend to us that it is incumbent upon Government
itself to do the very thing which this section is intended to prevent,
namely, the dissemination to the world at large of anarchical, revolu-
tionary, inflammatory or seditious literature. Nor do I think that any
one is likely to contend that if the printer or publisher is so afraid of the
contents of the pamphlet or book that he is publishing that he keeps the
name of the press at which it is printed secret that he is entitled to much
consideration if his pamphlet or book is found objectionable and is
forfeited.
Now in the case of literature produced outside India and imported
into the country, the Government have all along possessed the power
to prohibit its importation under the provisions of the Sea Customs
Act and the forfeiture of such prohibited publications, which may be
found to have escaped seizure at the seaports and to have found their way
into the country, is the natural complement of the power to order their
seizure at the ports. The bulk of the literature of this description under
this particular section 12 is literature that is plainly revolutionary or
designedly mischievous, though occasionally it may be found necessary
to proscribe some document which though it may not be open to
specially strong objection among European readers might yet be
dangerous if circulated in India. In all these cases Government have no
information as to how many copies have entered India or who their
possessors may be; and to publish the contents of such document in
Gazette Notifications can only be described as an act of extreme folly. Ifc
is therefore not possible for the Government to consent to the provisions
oi: section 12 being amended so as to bring them into conformity with
the other section that I have mentioned.
A good deal has been said, Sir, of the pledge given by the Hon'ble
Mr. Sinha in his speech on the Press Act when it was being passed into
law. But, as Mr. Pandit has just said, Mr. Sinha in describing the
varous safeguards was clearly dealing entirely with the safeguards
afforded by the Act when either the security deposited or a press was
being forfeited.
This will appear from the very remarks which the Hon'ble Mover himself
quoted. After discussing the various circumstances under which such
forfeiture, i.e., forfeiture of securities deposited by presses, can take place,
Mr. Sinha proceeded to say ' Is it not a safeguard to provide that a man
will not have his security forfeited without being told exactly what he has
HON'BLE sm REGINALD CEADDock. 221
Written that is taken exception to?' Obviously that passage in the Hon'ble
Mr, Sinha's speech could have no application to section 12, when no
security is being forfeited and when in the majority of cases the possessor
of the proscribed book is not the writer of the offending article, unless
indeed he produced it secretly.
I may remind the Council that though the Press Act of 1910 was
thoroughly examined by a Select Committee, some members of which put
in notes of dissent, and although many Hon'ble Members proposed
amendments to various sections of the Act, yet there was not a single
reference made either in any of the minutes of dissent to the provision of
this section 12, nor did a single Member move in the Council to amend
that section. The Hon'ble Mover might perhaps be taken to suggest —
or it may be the suggestion of some people in the Council— ^that this was
mere inadvertence ; but Mr. Sinha was making his ^speech after the
report of the Select Committee had been received. It was not a case
merely of introducing the Bill, when Members had not had time to grasp
its provisions. It is not a very long Bill. It had been examined line by
line, clause by clause, by the Members of the Select Committee, and it
was quite impossible therefore that a marked difference between section
12 and the other sections could have passed unnoticed by mere in-
advertence. The^fact is, as I have described, that the section was
intended for a totally different set of circumstances, and that the differ-
ence in wording was absolutely intentional.
I will now turn to the second recommendation contained in the Reso-
lution. I may say at once that the action to be taken under the Press
Act was all along intended to be the action of the Executive Government,
but power was rightly reserved to no authority lower than the Local
Government itself. This of course was in itself a very valuable safeguard.
No Local Government is going to publish abroad* or take action which
may come before the public or the High Court which is likely to show that
it has acted in a very foolish and irresponsible manner. The Acts in the
Statute-book are full of large powers reserved to Local Governments, and
it is always assumed that the Local Government is a responsible body
•who will exercise those powers with reason and discretion. The only
issue that it was intended should be submitted to judicial decision,
and that only to a special bench of the High Court, was the question
wh-ther the words, illustrations, etc., which formed the subject of forfeiture
fell within the aim of section 4 of the Act or not. Sir Herbert Risley
said on this point : ' So far I have dealt only with the powers which are
given by the Act ' that was his previous description, ' I will now turn to
the check we have provided. This consists of an appeal to a special
tribunal of three Judges of the High Court against any order of forfeiture
passed by the Local Government. If it appears to the High Court that
the matter in respect of which the order was passed does not come within
the terms of section 4 of the Bill, then the High Court will set aside the
order of forfeiture,' ' I think it will be admitted, ' he goes on to say,
* that that is a very complete check upon any hasty or improper action
by the Local Government. We have therefore, ' he concluded, ' barred
all other legal remedies.' Consequently it is quite clear that there never
was any intention to give any special bench of the High Court any other
power except to decide Aye or No whether the words, etc., complained
of did or did not come within the description contained in the clauses
of section 4.
222 THE HON'BLE SIR REGINALD CRADDOC&.
Very naturally, tbe Executive Government will always desire to
comply with the forms and prescriptions of the law as the procedure to be
followed ; but the vital issue in this case — in all these cases — is whether
the document concerned was or was not open to the construction placed
on it which made its forfeiture proper, — whether that writing did or did
not fall within the terms of section 4 of the Bill. That is the vital issue-
vital to public interests and vital to private interests. If a technical
error, and as I said, any irregularity of that kind would be unintentional
on the part of the Government, if such irregularity were to come in and
if that error in the form of the notification were to vitiate the action
taken, then the most revolutionary pamphlet might have a free
circulation while the error was being discussed and rectified. The
Hon'ble Mover and various other speakers have laid great stress
on the judgment of the learned Chief Justice in the Macedonia Pamphlet
case. Now I have studied the judgment with all the care that
a pronouncement by so high an authority deserves. So far as any judicial
finding of the Hon'ble Judges is concerned, it would not be proper for me
in this Council to enter upon any discussion as to the correctness or not
of their decision. But the learned Chief Justice appears to have been
under some misapprehension when he opined that the mischief chiefly
aimed at by the Press Act of 1910 was to check anarchical crime and
political assassination. Although the legislature included incitements
to these crimes in this Act, it had already passed Act VII of 1 908 dealing
with such objects, and the maiu object of the Press Act was to exercise a
preventive control over seditious and mischievous writings which the
prosecution of individual offenders had hitherto failed to secure. I
mention this point although it has not been specifically referred to by the
Hon'ble Mover or any of the other speakers, because naturally enough the
judgment of so high an authority as the learned Chief Justice of Bengal
may at any time be quoted in connection with the Press Act, There are
some remarks in that judgment which were based, partly, apparently on
his apprehension that the Act had been intended for the particular class
of case involving incitements to violence. To that extent his judgment
might be held to support the suggestion made by some speakers, although
not very directly put, that the stringent circumstances which called the
Act into existence and necessitated its being passed were no longer so acute.
The Hon'ble Mover himself has once or twice referred to the fact that this
judgment might be held in some sense to justify the repeal of the Act —
at any rate, to justify its considerable amendment. Therefore I wish to
make clear what real object of the Act was. and to remove any misappre-
hension to which this obiter dictum of the Chief Justice might have given
rise.
Sir Herbert Risley, when moving the introduction of the Bill and
explaining it, said that the check of incitement to murder and violence
had been included in the Press Act of 1910, although it was already
covered by the Press Act of 1908, because it was considered advisable
to include such incitements in this Bill * in order that we may ,if
necessary, take action of a less severe kind than that prescribed by the
Act of 1908. ' But besides such incitements there were five other classes
of writings against which the Press Act of 1910 was directed, and these
are all duly specified in section 4. Now it is quite true that the Chief
Justice did complain that a mandatory portion of section 12 had not been
complied with in the Government Notification, and he also alluded to
THE EON'BLE SIR REGINALD CRADDOCK. 223
the very wide terms in which section 4 had been drawn. But you will
find in his judgment that he committed himself to no specific statement
that the interpretation placed upon the document then before the Court
by the Government was itself far-fetched or arbitrary ; and he
emphatically stated his concurrence in the view that the ability to
pronounce on the wisdom or unwisdom — I am not talking about the
legality or illegality, the lawfulness or the unlawfulness— but to pronounce
on the wisdom or unwisdom of the Executive action, had been rightly
withheld from the Court, and he gave his reasons for that view in no
uncertain terms.
I pass now to the statement that the obligation of the Government
in issuing the Notification under section 12, of stating the grounds for its
opinion, had not been discharged. The learned Chief Justice
undoubtedly said that the Court had felt some embarrassment from the
absence of these stated grounds in the Notification. But it has always
been understood by Local Governments that when ordering the forfeiture
of a document under section 12 it was sufficient ground for the
Notification to specify which of the six clauses in section 4 and the
sub-clauses attached to those sections were held to be applicable to the
particular case. Thus if the possessor of a forfeited book were to ask
why his book was forfeited, the Notification would tell him, because, in
the opinion of the Local Government, it incited or tended to incite to
murder, or it might be because it incited or tended to incite to the
commission of an offence under the Explosive Substances Act, or incited
or tended to incite to any act of violence ; or again it might be that the
writing complained of had a tendency to seduce any officer, soldier or
sailor in the Army or Navy, or fell under one or other of the numerous
sub-clauses, within which the Writings might fall; and when the
Notification appeared, by a reference to it, the publice at large, and the
possessor of a proscribed document, would be abJe to judge what were the
real reasons which led to the forfeiture of that document. But although
the Chief Justice complained of em harassment, neither he nor the Judges
who sat with him indicated precisely what kind of facts or what kind of
information would be held to comply with the letter of the Section. The
reproduction of the document in extenso would, as I have said, clearly be
most uuwise, and it would not put the chance possessor of the document
in any better position than he was before. He has the document before
him ; mere reproduction of the document in the Notification will not put
him in any better position to understand why it was being forfeited.
Then the reproduction of certain passages which were deemed most
objectionable would be equally undesirable for general publication in the
Notification ; and I think that every one would agree that it would be
impossible for the Government to include in its Notification a discussion
of the various arguments which had moved it, Especially would this be
the case when there was a chance that the matter would come before a
Judicial tribunal; or even if there were no other objections to such a
course the Government could obviously not bind itself, in the public
interest, to the particular arguments contained in the Notification
indeed it must be remembered that in a great majority of these cases
any delay in the order of forfeiture might result in the circulation of
much dangerous and seditious and mischievous writings before action
could be taken. Even were the Government to attempt to comply with
this section in some further way by quoting the particular paragraphs or
224- THE HON'BLE MR. BANERJEE, AND IHE HOX'BLE SIR REGINALD
CRADDOCK.
lines of the offending document, yet in very many cases the pamphlets
etc., that are proscribed are throughout frankly revolutionary, or else,
their character may be deduced from their general effect on their readers,
or may be deduced from their tone as a whole rather than from any single
sentence extracted and divorced from its context. It is certainly a most
relevant issue in this case, that although a considerable number — some-
where between 300 and 400 — leaflets, books and publications have been
proscribed by the various Local GDvernments since the Act was passed
into law, no such forfeiture has ever before been challenged on this
particular ground. For although it may be said that it is difficult to
prove the negative in cases like these, and that the onus of proving, that
the writing is not open to the construction put upon it by the Government,
lies on him, yet in effect there is no doubt that his position will not prove
so burdensome as might be thought. For there is the document before
both of them; both sides have equal opportunities of patting before the
Court the construction which, from their point of view, should be placed
upon it, and it remains for the Court to decide upon the document and
upon the arguments of both sides whether that construction is borne out
by the document or is not.
The Hon'ble Mover referred to the cases in which the Press Act had
been applied during the last three years, on information supplied him by
the Home Secretary ; but he included them all in one total, and various
Members committed a small arithmetical error in pointing out that 800
cases in three years made a little more than one a day, while as a matter
of fact—
The Hon'Tale Mr. Bannorjee :— I said a little less than one a day.
The Hon'ble Sir- Reginald Craddook :— The Hon'ble Mover said a
little less than one a day, but it was another speaker who said that it carne
to a little more than one a day. As a matter of fact there are at present
1,647 newspapers and periodicals in India. Since the Act was brought
into force, security was deposited from presses under section 3 in 147 cases
only, and from publishers under section 8 in 100 cases, Uuder section 4,
that is to say, when security which was given by the printer or the keeper
of a press was forfeited, there have been only 5 cases altogether. Under
section 6 there has been no case ; that is, where the offending press
having had its security forfeited and having given further security, offends
for a second time ; and of that there has been no case.
Under section 9, that is the one under which security is forfeited, there
have been two cases. Under section 11, when security is forfeited for a second
time, there have been no cases. There have been altogether five applica-
tions only to High Courts in respect of orders of forfeiture or any other
orders from which the law allows an appeal to the High Court, there have
been only five cases ; and, to the best of my knowledge, none of these have
been successful. The large numbers which go to swell the total quoted by
the Hon'ble Mover really relate to the proscriptions by Local Governments
of these numerous leaflets and pamphlets, some of them of a very blood-
thirsty kind, which have issued from time to time. In many of these
cases also the Local Governments have merely repeated- the notifications
of other local Governments so that if you arrive at the total of the
THE HOS'BLE SIB REGINALD CEADDOCK. 225
documents affected by adding up the total of the proscriptions of each
Local Government, you may largely overstate the case. I happen to be
able to make this point the more clear, for I observed that the number of
forfeitures have been largest in the Central Provinces and most of these for-
feitures were made when I was Chief Commissioner of the Central Provinces,
The reason why these forfeitures were large is because we reproduced
and followed the lead of the surrounding provinces and from our
central position we had colonists and immigrants of every race and
language settled in our midst, and of course if a book or pamphlet 13
pernicious there is no reason why you should give exemption to particular
people merely because they are not numerous. Although the total
number 01' proscriptions in the Central Provinces comes to 291, yet the
total number of original proscriptions were only three. That illustrates
clearly how it is that these numbers from the various Provinces appear to
represent a great number of proscriptions ; though they total up to 1,100,
as a matter of: fact they have been just over 300 I think, therefore, that
the Council will agree that the Press Act has been very moderately carried
out and put into operation. Although the Hon'ble Mover from time to
time, and other Honourable Members represent to us, that the tone of the
Press has greatly improved and that the general situation has also greatly
improved — it is a favourite topic with the Hon'ble Mover — it seems to me
it would he very rash to remove these very things that have secured that
improvement. You might as well say to us when after great labour and
expense and many sanitary regulations we have improved the health of
a town 'why have this expense an.l these harassing regulations, why not
get rid of them ?' What applies to the bodily health of a country may also
apply to the mental health of its newspapers. Well, Sir, I am conscious
that it may be said that although I have explained that there is nothing
in the Act which can be held to be in any way cpntrary to any pledge or
to its original intentions yet, from the judgment in the Macedonia case, it
is difficult, and it remains difficult, for the possessor of a document to
prove that the language of the document was wholly innocent and
innocuous. I have drawn attention to the fact that the learned Chief
Justice never said that that particular case of forfeiture was far-fetched.
One of the Judges who s&t with him, Mr. Justice Stephen, said : —
I can well understand that in the mind of some Indian M uhammadans anger might easily
and perhaps justifiably turn to a hatred of the Allies, from which, making allowance for the
intirinities of human nature, a hatred of the co-religionists of the Allies would seem but a
short step, especially for those whose co-religionists are involved in a national disaster.
While therefore the action taken in the Macedonia Pamphlet case did
not strain the law in any way, it certainly seems unnecessary for us to
seek to amend the law on account of that case. The fact that it has been
difficult in the past to prove that offending documents were innocent,
seems to me the very surest testimony that the executive authorities have
exercised their powers in no arbitrary or far-fetched manner, and have
only proscribed those publications which are really dangerous in one of the
ways mentioned in the Act.
As for the future, Sir, I have a very lively faith in the independence
of our High Court Judges and I feel, no doubt, if at any time the Executive
Government should use their powers under this Act rashly or oppressively,
that the Judges will find no difficulty in surmounting these obstacles and
226 THE HON'BLE PANDIT MADAN MOHAN MALAVI?A.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan 2£alaviya said :— Sir, the re-
marks whiclih avedeen made by the Hon't'le the Ho!iie Member with regard
to this Resolution which is now before the Council have simplified matters
to a great extent. The issues are now clear. There has been a great
deal of confusion in a portion of the discussion as to the real issue that is
In-fore the Council. There has been no suggestion on the part of thj
llon'blo Mover that the Press Act should be repealed ; the only proposal
before the Council is that it should be amended in certain specified matters.
Now, Sir, objection has been taken to the proposal to amend the Act It
has been pointed out there is a difference in section 12 and section 4 and
subsequent sections, and the difference is no doubt marked, but I submit
that however different, this shows why the sections were framed as they
were. Both the Hon'ble the Advocate-General and the Hon'ble the Home
Member have mentioned that one of the reasons against stating the
grounds upon which the forfeiture is ordered is that there will be a
dissemination of the matter contained in the offending pamphlet. Now,
Sir, the legislature provided against that. In the language used in
section 4 it is said that tbere should be a notice in writing not to the
world at large but to the keeper of trie printing press. In section 6
a^ciin it is said: 'The Local Government may, by notice in writing to
the keeper of such printing pi ess, stating or describing such words, signs-
or visible representations, declare,' etc. Then we corne to section 9 in
which it is again repeated : * The Local Government may, by-.^iotire in
•writing to the publisher of such newspaper, stating or describing '^uch
words, signs or visible representations, declare.' So also in section 111.
In all these sections the person concerned is the publisher or keeper of
the printing press. The legislature have laid down that when an order
for forfeiture is passed, the Local Government should * state the
grounds for the opinion upon which it has based its action, namely, that
the words described in the pamphlet have offended within the meaning of
the Act. But when we come to section 12 the language used is different.
In that section the Council will notice it is said ' the Local Government)
may, by notification in the locaf official gazette, stating the grounds for
its opinion, declare such book other document to be forfeited. '
*
So long, therefore, as we are dealing with persons who are the keepers
of printing presses or publishers oi newspapers, a statement. of the grounds
upon which the Local Government has based its action will not lead to
the dire results which the Hon'ble the Advocate-General and the Hon'ole
the Home Member apprehend. It is only in the case of a^ forfeiture
where a publication will have to be made in a local gazette that such a
danger could have arisen, and there the legislature has guarded against
it by saying that it is merely stating the grounds ; in the othei c^es
the words, etc, are to be reproduced. In section 4 and the other
subsequent sections the Local Government is required to say by notice
in writing to the keeper of such printing press, stating or describing such
words, signs or visible representations. Thess words are omitted in
section 12, which merely requires ihat the Local Government should
state the grounds of its opinion and declare such newspaper, etc.. forfeited.
So, that, Sir, unless the matter comes before a judicial tribunal, as the
Hon'ble the Home Member said, there would not be much danger of any
dissemination of poisonous matter by reason of the statement of the
o >ject, and on that ground, I do not think that th«re need be any
apprehensions, But as the Hoii'ble the Advocate-General said very
HON'BLE PANDIT MADAN MOHAN MALAVIYA, 227
clearly, the law requires that these grounds should be stated, and I do not
think that rny friend's amendment, so far as this part of the Resolution,
is concerned, can be supported. Not only because of the statement of
the Advocate-General, but because of the language of the Act, it is clear
that no such amendment is required so far as that section is concerned.
But, Sir, the point before the Council raised by the Resolution is that
relating fco section 22. Section 4 and section 12 provide that on a person's
doing a certain thing certain results will follow and it gives authority to
the Local Government in those circumstances to issue an order of forfeiture
of the printing press, newspaper, etc. No one questions that this Act, as
the Hon'ble Home Member said, was passed to vest in the Executive power
which would allow them to deal summarily with offending newspapers and
printing presses aii.i I do not doubt that that object was very clearly
before the mind of the Legislature when the Act was passed ; but the
question, Sir, is that the Legislature has laid down that in a certain set of
circumstances the Local Government will have the power to perform
certain acts, to declare a printing press forfeited or to order security to be
deposited or to order a book to be forfeited. The question now before
the Council is — and it has been very powerfully raised in the judgment
of the Calcutta High Court — if the Local Government, in the exercise
of the power which the Act has vested in the Local Government, fails
to observe the procedure which is laid down in the Act, is there to be
any remedy for the person aggrieved by the act of the Local Government
or not ? The Legislature has thought"* it fit to say that there shall be
certain safeguards. We need not go very much into a discussion as to
what the pledges at the time were or what the intention was. We have
got the x\ct, and we have to deal with it as it standvS, Now, in the Act, Sir,
in section 6 and subsequent section it is laid down that the Local Govern-
ment shall describe the words or signs or visible representations which in, its
opinion, offend against the provision of the Act, and it also says that it
shall describe the reason of its opinion. If the Local Government fail to
describe it, I submit that the safeguard that is provided has been taken
away. The safeguard lay in the Local Government reproducing the
offending words in order to warn the person concerned that he had offended,
and secondly, in the fact that when the Local Government came really to
consider whether there was anything in the publication which came within.
tUe purview of the Act, it would have to calmly consider what the exact
meaning of the words used was and that judicial act whieh the Local
Government would have to exercise under the Act would provide the exact
safeguard against any injuistice being done to the person to whom the
notice goes. Secondly, in the case of stating its opinion and the reason for
its opinion — say, for instance, in the case of section 12, when the Local
Government decides to publish in a newspaper that a certain book or
pamphlet is to be forfeited on the ground that it offends within the
meaning of section 4 of the Act, I submit the mere fact that the Govern-
ment has to state its grounds was one of the safeguards provided by the Act.
But now, Sir, suppose that the Local Govrnment fails to respect the
safeguard ; fails, that is to say, to either refer to any words in the
proclamation or in the notice, or it fails to state the grounds of its opinion,
where the words are not referred to, for thinking the words do offend within
the meaning of the Act, what is th<? remedy of the person ? Throughout
the British Empire, where there is any right given to a man there is a
certain remedy provided in the criminal law of the country and the
228 THE HON'BLT; PANDIT MADAN MOHAN MALAWI.
Criminal Procedure Code. The High Court, as being the highest Court of
appeal, is vested with the power of revising any act of any authority or
person, including the Local Government and the Government of India, if
it has not been done under the sanction of some statute or law That power
may be restricted, Sir, as it has been rsetricted under the Press Act that
we are discussing. But then, if the restriction is not justifiable, as has
been shown in the judgment of the Calcutta High Court, it is time that,
in the interests of justice, the Government should consider the matter. If
any person were to take away any person Js property except strictly in
accordance with the law, that person could go up to the High Court and
say, ' My property has been unjustly taken away : exercise your re visionary
jurisdiction and set aside the order. ' Here was property taken away under
section 1 2 of the Press Act. There was an application to the High Court in
which it was pleaded that the property was not taken away in compliance
with the provisions of section 12 of the Act. Now, Sir, the High Court
was satisfied that it was so. The Hon'ble and learned Chief Justice said,
Sn words which can never be mistaken, that he was satisfied that there was
room for interference by him, but he said, he is barred. The Hon'ble the
Chief Justice in his learned judgment says — in one passage he sums up
the whole situation : —
The Advocate General has convinced me that the Government's view of this piece of
legislation is correct aud that that the High Court's power of intervention is the narrowest.
Its power to pronounce on the legality of the forfeiture by reason of failure to observe the
mandatory conditions of the Act is barred. The ability to pronounce on the wisdom or
unwisdom of the Executive order is withheld and its functions are limited to considering
whether the applicant to-day has discharged the almost hopeless task of establishing that his
pamphlet does not contain words which fall within the all-comprehensive j revisions of this
Act.
It goes on to say : —
I describe it as an almost hopeless task because the terms of section 4 are so wide that
it is scarcely conceivable that any publication would attract the notice of the Government
in this connection to which some of the provisions of that section might not directly or
indirectly, whether by inference, suggestion, allusion, metaphor or application or otherwise
apply.
Now, Sir, the Hon'ble Home Member, in his admirable reply, said
that there was reason and the learned Chief Justice did recognise the
force of the provision that the High Court should not have the ability to
pronounce upon the wisdom or unwisdom of the Executive, and that it
had been rightly withheld, but the Hon'ble Member did not, and perfectly
rightly he did not, justify the withholding of the power from the High
Court to pronounce on the legality on the forfeiture by reason of failure
to observe the mandatory conditions of the Act. I submit, Sir, that a
very strong case has been made out for the Government to consider the
whole position. We all, I think, are agreed — I don't think there has
been one dissentient voice — that writing which is calculated to injure
public interests, to excite evil passions or to create bad blood, should, .
under certain circumstances and certain safeguards, be absolutely checkedi
We are all agreed that the press ought to be helped by restrictions and
regulations to run a smooth and honourable course and not abuse the
great liberty which it enjoys, but, Sir, bearing all that in mind, the
Legislature has passed an enactment, which is admitted on all sides to be
au enactment of a very repressive character, to regulate the action of the
press. Under this Act those who offend can be punished. But suppose
there are persons who do uot offend, who are not guilty of violatiirg the
THK HON'BLE THE VICE-PRESIDENT ; THE HON'BLE PANDIT 229
MADAN MALAVIYA; AND THE HON'BLE SIR IBRAHIM RAHIMTOOLA.
provisions of the Act, is there a safeguard provided to protect them from
an injury which they have not deserved, which the Government most
certainly does not wish that they should suffer, and which was not
contemplated ? Now, Sir, that was the provision with regard to this
section. Under sections 4 and 6 and under section 19 there are certain
things which can be done, but section 22 definitely limits the operation,
as the Hon'ble Judges of the High Court have held, of the interference
of the High Court only to cases where the High Court is to ask the
applicant to show that the words complained of do not fall within the
definition of section 4. And the substance of the amendment now before
the Council, Sir, is that the Government should be pleased, in view of the
remarks of the Chief Justice and of facts which have come within its
knowledge, to reconsider this Act and make up for the deficiencies both
with regard to this section 22 by incorporating a provision to make it clear
that the general power which the High Court possesses undoubtedly of
remedying any wrong which may be done under cover of an Act is
not taken away from the High Court so far as this is concerned and
also—-
The Hon'ble the Vice-President :— I nmst ask the Hon'ble Member
to resume his seat. He has already exceeded his time.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya:— May I con-
clude, Sir ?
The Hon'ble the Vice-President : —You may conclude in one minute.
The Hon'ble Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya :— To make it clear
that the High Court will still have the power to give a remedy to a person
who has a real grievance that the provisions of the Act have not been
complied with and that he has been wrongly dealt with, and I hope that
when the times comes an amendment of other sections will also be consi-
dered and the Act put on such a basis that it should not be subjected to
the severe criticism which this Act has been subjected to and similar to
which no other Act of Government has ever been subjected.
The Eon'ble Sir Ibrahim Rahimtoola :— Sir, I think it will be
^cognised that the the question at issue before the Conncil has been
very ably discussed from all aspects of the case. The Hon'ble the Home
Member and the Hon'ble the Advocate General have very ably laid before
the Council the Government view of the case and they have explained in what
manner the safeguards actually act under the provisions of the law. I think
it will be admitted that, when the Press Act was passed in 1910, much of the
non-official opposition was won over on the ground that adequate
safeguards had been provided in the Act, and were it not for the weight
and importance attached to the safeguards in the speeches made on the
occasion, it is very likely that considerably greater opposition would have
been extended to the measure when it was passed. I think the Council is
indebted to the Hon'ble the Home Member for having clearly explained
that though so much was made 6ut of the safeguards, in actual practice the
safeguards are nil, and I will try to explain why I say so. The Hon'ble
Member said that the very fact that the local Governments were required
230 THE HOis'BLE SIR IBRAHIM RAHIMTOOLA.
to exercise the powers under the Act was a safeguard. I admit it to be
so. But the local Govern meats have got to net on the reports of their
subordinate officers. Most of these publications are in the vernacular,
\vhich I do not think many members of the local Governments themselves
know. They have therefore to rely upon the reports and the translations
of their subordinates before making their orders. If that is regarded as
a safeguard, the people who hold it as such are welcome to that opinion,
but I think that this Council will want some further safeguards against the
orders passed by a Local Government, which is after all the highest
executive authority in each Province, and such safeguards have to be
provided.
I should like to point out that the reference to be judicial courts
provided in the Act is • that appeals shall be heard by a bench of at least
three judges of the highest court in a Province, if there are three or more
judges in that Province; but that if there are only two judges they will
form the tribunal of appeal ; and if they disagree, that is to say, if one
judge holds that the order ought to be set aside and the other hold that the
order should stand, then the order does stand. ' There is no further
remedy for the appellant. If there are three judges, then the view of the
majority prevails. Now, Sir, the safeguard in the Act, as very lucidly
explained by the Hon'ble the Home Member, ia merely this : that the
judicial bench will decide whether the action of forfeiture taken by a Local
Government co ues within the provisions of section 4. if any words (and
a few words in a book or pamphlet may be held to do so) come within what
lias been aptly described as the comprehensive provisions of seecion 4,
then the order must stand. Be it remembered that when an appellaat
goes to the High Court in these matters he has to face heavy expenditure
in costs, and when he goes up in appeal all that he can have is a
declaration from the High Court that in the most comprehensive terms in
which section 4 has been drafted and embodied in the Act a few words or
fii«"ns, or visible representations do come within the purview of section 4,
and therefore no relief is allowable. That to my miud completely disposes
of the question of safeguards.
Then we come to the next point, namely, that we should repose trust
and confidence in the executive actions of Local Governments. No one
wishes to raise at this stage the slightest question as to the manner in
which these provisions are given effect to by Local authorities, but it sbuuls
to reason that when Government ask the Legislative Council to sanction
legislative measures empowering large and comprehensive powers to be
given to them, they ought to follow one of two courses. They ought to
say, ' gentlemen, we want these powers to be conceded to us, and we want
you to extend to us your trust and confidence in regard to the manner in
which we will apply them.' That would be a perfectly straight course, and
if they do that and the Council accepts that view, there is nothing further
to be said. But if they come to this Council and say that l though wo
want certain powers in regard to matters which are under consideration
and that in order that these powers may not be arbitrarily exercised, we
suggest embodying in the Act certain safeguards to protect people who
m°y b> adversely affected by executive action under those provisions.' We
are entitled to ask that those safeguards should be effective and of such a
character as to give the relief which Government themselves propose they
should have. Now, Sir, the question at issue before the Council, when the
THE HON'ULE MR. CHAKARAVARTI VIZIARAGHAVACHARIAR. 231
latter alternative is adopted by Government, is to see whether the
safeguards which are deliberately intended to be provided are real and
effective, or are merely illusory. If they have been declared illusory by
the Calcutta High Court, the Hon'ble Mr. Bane gee's .Resolution, which,
merely asks that they may be made effective, should be accepted. I do not
see that there is any reason why they should not be made so effective by
an amendment of the Act.
Our experience in the Legislative Councils has shown that there have
been frequent occasions on which Executive Governments have come befoie
the Legislative Councils asking for amendments of existing enactments,
on the ground that while the original intention of the legislature was in
certain specified directions and the Bill had been drafted OH those lines and
passed, matters had gone to the High Court and that Court had put a
different interpretation upon the words used, necessitating an amendment
in order to carry out the original intention of the legislature. Well, Sir,
that lias often been the case so far as Bombay is concerned; a,nd we must
recognise that however able the draftsmen may be, they are not infallible.
Vv hen Government have thus frequently approached the Legislative
Councils to amend enactments in view of the interpretations put upon
them by the High Court going against the original intentions, surely
it is open to us to go to the legislature also and to say that in view of the
safeguards deliberately provided in the Act having proved illusory,
Government should take steps to introduce amendments in order to give
elff'd to their original intentions and to make the safeguards real a'nd
effective,
Aa the Huh'ble Mr. Banerjee 's Resolution asks for nothing more, I
beg to support it,
Tk© 3£oa"b!e Mr Chakaravarti Viziaragkayaehariar :-- Sir, I wish
to s;>y a tew words on the question be fore u.s. It seems to me that the
issue is <i very nanow one. What is asked for is a verbal amendment
of the Act, and I hope that previous speakers will forgive me if I say
that a gieat deai of their observations were somewhat irrelevant to tho
issue before tis. The question broadly is whether this particular law WP.S
intended to he made in accordance with the declared intentions or not.
Now the High Court has found that there was a considerable discrepancy
betvvten the declaration and the performance in respect of this enactment
and *he mover of the Resolution asks that this discrepancy may be
removed. I do not at all see any rigid distinction between the provisions
under section 12 and the provisions of the other sections relating to
forfeiture in reference to appeals, because the law distinctly says thai any
man who has an interest in the subject of these forfeituies, no matter
under whut section the order for the forfeiture has been made, whether
under section 12 or under the other sections, has a right to appeal to the
High Court. The only question therefore to consider is, is the Act under
consideration in accordance with the express declarations and intentions
of Government? We have nothing whatever to do with the question
whether the political position has since improved, or has remained station-
ary or has grown worse. We must try to understand our position some-
what retrospectively, and see what those who made this law intended it
to be.
AH regards this question, the High Court have distinctly declared that
there is an inconsistency between tho declaration and the performance.
232 THE HON'BLE MR. CHAKARVARTI VIZIARAGHAVACHARIAR.
The learned Advocate-General, I believe traverses this point. I always*
yield to him in construing law and wish to yield to his argument if I can.
But I would remind him of the statement which he himself made in the
course of the argument in the case of Mr. Mahomed AH. When the learned
Chief Justice was about to refer to the speeches made in this Council at the
time of the passing of the Act, the distinguished Advocate-General stopped
him and said ' Please don't, look at the Act itself.' You are not at all
entitled to look at the speeches.' He said this in the consciousness that
there was a discrepancy between the speeches and the Act. If there was
no such discrepancy, why did the learned Advocate-General adjure the
Chief Justice not to look at the speeches ? Therefore, so far as the
argument of the learned Advocate-General is concerned, I believe he
agrees with me that the performance was not in accordance with the
declarations.
Then there is the speech of the Hon'ble the Home Member, I am some-
what embarrassed in understanding his position as much as were the
Judges of trie Calcutta High Court in understanding the Act. If he claims
as a member of the Government to construe the Act with a competency
which others do not possess, I humbly enter my respectful caveat. He was
not here when the Act was passed, any more than I. As to the present and
future intentions of Government in reference to the Act, no doubt he is
Government, but as to the construction that should be put upon it when
it was passed, I claim fellowship with him while disclaiming equal capacity.
At that time, in view of what members on behalf of Government said,
Government offered consolation to the members and to themselves that it
was not a purely executive measure. I would call attention to Sir H.
Risley's statement in this connection, It is said it is administered by the
Executive Government. It may be administered by the Executive
Government, but the measure is not an executive measure and it cannot
be administered in the sense of a purely departmental order or of what is
called an act of State. To the extent to which the executive G-overiiinent
administers this Act it is a judicial tribunal and the powers exercised are
judicial, and what is more appeals are allowed by the law to the High
Court,
It is in these circumstances that the question arises as to what was
then intended. Now I do not see how a distinction made between section
12 and the other sections is germane to the question at issue. The Re-
solution may be divided into two parts. The first part relates to the
question whether a statement of the grounds of action under certain sec-
tions of the the Act is imperative. The High Court have distinctly held
that it is imperative : there is no doubt about that. I cannot therefore
understand the official position taken up, which, if it means anything
clearly, practically amounts to saying. " We do not care about what the
High Court has said and we will do as we please." The Act has been
construed and declared to have a particular meaning by the High Court
and I believe even the Executive Government is bouud to abide by that
declaration and interpretation, unless and until it amends the Act itself.
Taking the law therefore, as it is, so far as the first portion of the Resolu-
tion is concerned, no reform or amendment is needed in my opinion. Mr.
Justice Woodroffe, Mr. Justice Stephen and the Chief Justice agreed that
the words there are imperative and that it is not open to the Executive
Government to violate that portion of the law and that they are bound to
THE SOtf'BLE MR. CHAKflAVARTl VlZlARAGHAVACHARIAR. 233
state the grounds so as to give an opportunity to the person concerned to
know what it is that he is called upon to answer. That being so, the
first part of the Resolution may be left out of consideration altogether in
my humble view.
As regards the latter part, I cannot understand the opposition at all.
Is it plain that there was a defect or is it plain that there was not a defect ?
It seems to me that the trend of the argument is this Apparently there
was a defect, but as it suits us we wish to have it. That, I understand
to be the upshot of the argument in opposition to the Resolution. The
Act makes no distinction as regards an appeal to the High Court between
one set of forfeitures and another set of forfeitures. I read the speeches
in the Council, both when the Bill was introduced and when it was passed,
to see if there was any distinction between this section 12 and the other
sections. I find there is none. The learned Advocate-General confines
the pledge of Mr. Sinha to one set of provisions but the speeches themselves
do not warrant such an interpretation as the Hon'ble the distinguished
Advocate-General has put upon them. It was admitted by the learned
Advocate-General that the Notification of forfeiture relating to Mr.
Mahomed Ali was unsatisfactory and that it was not drawn up by a lawyer.
While the learned Judges in playful irony declared that what they were
saying might come within the Act. Also all the three learned Judges say
that they were considerably embarrassed in dealing with this case. The
Chief Justice said so. In the course of argument Mr. Justice Woodroffe
asked this question of the Advocate- General : * Has the reference to this
Court any reality at all ? Can this Court fulfil* any function at all ?
"WhiJe so, we may take it that all the three Judges were considerably
embarrassed in interpreting the Act. Mr. Justice Stephens says : ' Never
was an English Judge since the early days of English Jurisprudence in so
helpless a position,' as he was in this case. So all these three Judges were
considerably embarrassed. Is it the object of this law to embarrass the
Judges, so that they may say 'We are helpless. We can't do anything/
All that we ask for is to make the language of the Act plain. There is
yet another aspect. And it relates to the question of the statement of grounds
in the order of forfeiture. It is said that it would defeat the object of the
Act to state the grounds in the order. Sir Herbert Risley said that * this
Act was intended to take the place of public opinion in India ; that in
England there is a strong public opinion, and that it is a weapon of national
education in this country.' May I know how this nation is to be educated
by this Act and its administration ? By embarrassing the learned Judges
of the High Court ? For God's sake, let us know how is this Act to educate
us ? It may repress us, it may cause inconvenience to us, but to say that
it will educate us is to use language which has no meaning if it is
kept in its present state. So this is the law which is to be a means of
national education — a weapon of national education which will embarrass
the brilliant Judges of the Calcutta High Court is an extraordinary inven-
tion worthy of 20th century civilisation, All we ask is this — ' Please put
the law in such a way that ordinary common sense can understand what is
meant by it. ' I cannot at all understand, therefore, the attitude
of the Hon'ble the Home Member, and I am somewhat surprised that
Government does not hold out any hope to us that it will hand the law over
to a learned expert to see in the light of what is said whether it cannot be
improved, I expected the Hon'ble the Home Member would have given
234 THE HON'BLE SIR GAtfaADHAR CHITNAVIS.
us an answer like that, and that the point raised will be sympathetically
considered. My disappointment is very keen that such a. hope is not held
out to us. I (lo not think it necessary to allude to the other observations
made by the Hon'ble and learned speakers on either side, because in my
opinion they are beside the issue. The Hon'ble the Home Member assured
us that the independence of the High Court would be maintained in its
integrity, and that where any obstacles are thrown in its way he has
expressed the hope that it will surmount them. I am thankful for the
assurance and I join in the hope. It strikes me that before this
judgment was passed, there are humble lawyers like myself who would
have thought that the High Court would have set aside this order as ultra
vires and void, which the Advocate-General and the Home Member both
say was declared by it to be valid order. I am sorry to state that to say
so is a brilliant quibble. The High Court did say that the order passed
by the Government was ultra vires — it was an order in no legal sense.
But they say ' we cannot give effect to our opinion by reason of this section
12,' To say that the High Court found this order to be valid is not correct.
They found it ultra vires, illegal and void, Mr. Justice Stephen asked
whether he was prevented from looking into this case because the Govern-
ment had no jurisdiction to pass such an order. Therefore to say that
the High Court has declared such an order to be valid is, I respectfully
suggest, a splendid mistake, a brilliant quibble.
On the whole therefore, Sir, the question is ' Have we or have we not to
revise this Act, intendejl not to suppress actual crime but to repress the
roots of crime and intended as a means of national education. What the
Government say amount to this >,, ' The High Court may say and do what
they like, but we will pass our orders as we have been hitherto doing
under the Act.' While in this unsatisfactory state the law is, the adminis-
tration must continue unsatisfactory too. I respectfully submit that the
case made out by the Hon'ble Mover of the Resolution as regards the
necessity for the reform of the latter portion of the Act, that section 12
should be amended, has not been answered at all by Government.
The Hon'tte Sir Crangadliar Ckitaavis ;— Sir, I do not agree with
the Hon'ble Mr. Banerjee that the time has come when the Act should be
repealed. I supported the measure in 1910 from an honest belief in its utility
in the existing circumstances. The experience gained in the interval in
the working of the Act has, if anything, confirmed me in the opinion that
it was necessary and good, both for the Government and the public. The
administration of the law has, as pointed out by the Home Member, so far
been satisfactory and unattended by any real or general haidship, while the
mere existence of such an Act has had a preventive and deterrent effect
upon the malevolent activity of a disaffected portion of the Press. There
is now less of incitement to violence, and there can be no donbt that the
most potent means of exciting hatred in the public mind before has been
the cheap and irresponsible Press. The Act has thus justified its exis-
tence. But this conviction does not prevent me from advocating an im-
provement in the language of the Act. To-day's discussion also shows
that there is a difference of opinion among the best of lawyers, that an
ambiguity exists, and that the law is not clear on certain points. And so it
will not be improper if the ambiguity and cause of embarrassment are
removed by making the provisions quite clear.
THE HON'BLE HR. BANERJEE, 235
Hoa'blo Mr- Banerjeo : — Sir, I will not, at this hour, take up
many minutes — especially in view of the criticisms which have already
;been offered by my Hon'ble friends over there on the speech of the Hon'ble
the Home Member and of the Hon'ble the Advocate-General. Sir, it is
abundantly clear from the discussion that has taken place, that, barring one
•exception of course, there is a general consensus of opinion as regards the
course that should be followed in connection with the Press Act. I think
we are all on this side of the House agreed that if there are safeguards
provided in the law, those safeguards are inoperative and that they should
be made effective, I am sorry .that there was a disposition on the part
of the Hon'ble the Home Member to go back upon the declarations of the
past and discard the safeguards provided in the law itself. For the Hon'ble
the Home Member observed that there was a danger in publicity. I am
afraid it is too late to make that complaint at this hour. Section after
section explicitly say that where notice of forfeiture is issued the grounds
should be stated. I hope the Government of India and the various Local
Governments will give effect to this part of the law, such as that law is. We
were expecting some kind of assurance from the Hon'ble the Home Member
that in future when a notice of forfeiture was issued the notice would
contain the grounds — would contain a statement of the words, signs or
visible representations as indicated in the law. I must confess to a sense
of disappointment that an assurance to that effect was not forthcoming.
But the Hon'ble the Home Member must have been" convinced of the
trend of public opinion as regards this matter. There is practically
unanimity in our ranks, amongst the non-official Indian Members, that the
law should be amended, so as to render operative the safeguards which have
been provided ; and if on this occasion 'there is to be an adverse vote, as I
fear there is likely to be, I feel that Council have not heard the last of
this matter ; because there is a body of public opinion in favour of an
amendment of this Act, and we, as representatives of the Public voicing
the public sentiment, will feel it our duty to give expression to that
sentiment within the walls of this Chamber. Whatever may be the outcome
of this debate, I am sure, I fear, that the matter will have to be brought
before this Council again.
The resolution was rejected by 40 votes against 17.
Rules made by the Chief Court, Punjab, under the power conferred by section
21 of the Indian Press Act, I of 1910, to regulate ike procedure in the
case of applications under section 17, the amount of the costs thereof
and the execution of the orders passed thereon, (No. 11 dated the
list April 1915).
1, These rules may be cited as " The Rules under the Indian Press Act,
1910." They shall come into operation on the 1st day of February 1913,
and shall apply to all applications made to, and all proceedings taken in,
the Chief Court of the Punjab at Lahore, under the Indian Press Act, 1910,
hereinafter referred to as " The Act. "
2. Every application to the Chief Court under section 17 of the Act,
to set aside an order of forfeiture under sections 4, 6, 9, 11 or 12, shall be
made by the presentation of a petition which shall be signed by the
applicant and verified at the foot by the affidavit of the applicant.
236 RULES MADE BT THE: CHIEF COCKTr PUNJAB, UNDER THE INDIAN
PBESS ACT, 1910.
3. The petition shall be written in- the English language on foolscap
paper or other paper similar to it in size and quality, bookwise, and divided
into paragraphs numbered consecutively. Dates and sums mentioned in
the petition shall be expressed in figures.
4. The petition shall be headed: —
In the Chief Court of the Punjab, at Lahore."
" In its special Bench constituted under Act I of 1910, "
and shall be name intituled " In the matter of the (name, if any) Printing
Press," or. " the (name or description) book, document" or " newspaper "
as th« case may be.
5. The petition shall state what the interest of the applicant is in the-
, property in respect of which the order of forfeiture has been made and all
documents and copies thereof in proof of such interest,, together with a
copy of the notice of forfeiture under sections 4, 6> 9, 11 or 12 of the Act
as the case may be, shall be annexed as exhibits to the petition*
6. The petitioner shall state the ground or grounds on which it is
sought to set aside the order of forfeiture.
7. The petitioner shall with his petition attach » receipt for a deposit of
rupees fifty to cover the cost of printing the record.
8. All Vernacular documents annexed as exhibits to the petition and all
Vernacular documents relied on by the applicant, and intended to be
tendered in evidence, shall be translated into English by the Chief Court
Translator, or Translators, so that no question may arise as to the accuracy
of the translations or the admissibility in evidence of the documents and
the translations annexed to them by reason of defects in *uch translations,
9. The petition with exhibits annexed thereto and their translations, if
any, together with a copy of such petition and exhibits with translations,
shall be presented to the Registrar, who will constitute a special Bench
composed of three Judges and appoint a day for the hearing and determina-
tion of the application under the orders of the Chief Judge.
10. The Registrar shall forthwith give notice of the filing of the
application to the Government Advocate and shall request him to obtain
from Government and to furnish to the Court, as soon as possible, a copy
of the particular newspaper, book, or other document containing the words,
signs or visible representations on which the declaration of forfeiture was
11. Notice in writing of the day appointed for the hearing and determina-
tion of the application shall be given by the Deputy Registrar to the
Chief Secretary to Government, Punjab, and the copy of the petition
and exhibits with translations, if any, mentioned in rule 9, shall accompany
such notice,
12. A printed paper book shall be prepared and completed under the
orders of the Deputy Registrar, at least one week before the day fixed for
the hearing and the determination of the application,
13. There shall be ordinarily printed 30 copies of the paper-book, but
the Deputy Registrar may, when necessary, direct a larger number to be
printed.
RULES MADE BY THE CHIEF COURT OF PUNJAB, UNDER THE INDIAN 237
PRESS ACT, 1910.
14. In the absence of a special order the printed paper-book shall
ordinarily contain—
(1) A reprint of such communications, articles, chapters, or passages
as are specified in the declaration of forfeiture, or, if these are
written in a language other than English, a translation thereof
prepared as directed in Kule 8 above.
(2) The declaration of forfeiture in respect of which the application
is made.
(3) The application and the affidavit of the applicant.
(4) Such exhibits annexed to the application, and their translations
as the Court may order to be printed.
15. If the deposit required under Rule 7 prove insufficient to cover the
cost of the printed paper-book, the Deputy Registrar may, by a notice
in writing, require that such further deposit as seems to him necessary
shall be made within one week.
16. If such further deposit be not made within the time specified in
the notice, the application shall be placed, without notice to the applicant,
before a Special Bench composed of three Judges, which will either
dismiss the application or pass such other order as may be suitable.
17. The applicant and his counsel shall be entitled to receive copies of
the printed record on application to the Deputy Registrar one week before
the date fixed for hearing.
18. At the foot of every printed paper-book shall be noted the amount
of the printing and incidental charges and the person from whom levied,
and such amount shall be included in the costs of the proceedings, unless,
the Court shall otherwise direct.
Should the amount so charged be less than the sum or sums deposited
under rules 7 and 15, the Deputy Registrar shall refund the balance to
the applicant,
19. The table of fees now in force in this Court shall be applicable to
all applications undar the Act and proceedings thereon and costs payable
in respect of such applications and proceedings shall be taxed, when so
directed, by the Taxing Officer of this Court.
20. Every summons and warrant of arrest issued by the Court shall be
in writing in duplicate, signed and sealed by the Deputy Registrar of the
Court and shall ordinarily be sent to the District Magistrate within the
local limits of whose jurisdiction the summons is to be served or the
warrant executed.
21. The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Rules and
Orders relating to the execution of decrees and orders shall be applicable
to the execution of orders passed by the Chief Court on applications
under the Act.
238 FOKEIGN DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION No. 1387-I-B. DATED THE
HTH AUGUST 1914.
areas
In exercise of the powers conferred by the Indian (Foreign Jurisdic-
tion) Order in Council, 1902, and of all other powers enabling him in
that behalf, the Governor General in Council is pleased to apply the
Indian Naval and Military News (Emergency) Ordinance, 1914 (Ordi-
nance No. 1 of 1914), in so far as it may be applicable to the
specified in the first column of the schedule hereto annexed.
Provided, first, that in the Ordinance as so applied, references to a
Local Government shall be read as referring to the authorities specified
in the second column of the said schedule :
Provided, secondly, that for the purpose of facilitating the application
of the said Ordinance, any Court exercising jurisdiction in any area
specified in the first column of the said schedule may construe the provi-
sions of the said Ordinance with such alterations not affectin^ the
substance as may be necessary or proper to adapt them to the matter
before the Court.
Schedule.
1. The railway lands described in the notification of the
Government of India in the Foreign Department,
No. 784-1. B., dated the 9th April 1913, as subse-
quently amended, and in the first and second columns
of the schedule annexed thereto.
2. The Baroda Cantonment
3. The Administered areas in Central India, as described
in the Notification of the Government of India in the
Foreign Department, No. 2365-1, B., dated the 14th
November, 1912.
4. The Administered areas in the Hyderabad State, as
described in the Notification of the Government of India
in the Foreign Department, No, 682-L B., dated the
22nd March 1913,
6. The Civil and Military Station of Bangalore
6. The Aba area, as described in the Notification of the
Government of India in the Foreign Department, No.
679-1. B., dated the 2nd April 1913.
7. The British Reserve, Manipar, as defined in the Notifica-
tion of the Government of India in the Foreign Depart-
ment, No. 533-1. B., dated the 12th March 19U9.
8. Berar ...
The authorities severally spe-
cified in the third column of
the same schedule.
The Resident at Baroda.
The Agent to the Governor
General in Central India.
The Resident at Hyderabad,
The Resident in Mysore.
The Agent to the Governor
General in Rajputana.
The Chief
Assam,
Commissioner of
The Chief Commissioner of the
Central Provinces.
LAW RELATING TO PRESS AND SEDITION.
INDEX.
ABANI Bhushan Chakravarti, Emperor v. — ... 43
ABBOTT, The Hon'b'.e Mr.— ... ... *2
ABDUL Grhafur und Liakat Husain v. Crown ... 22
ABDUL Haq v. Crown ... ... ...
ABINAS Chandra Bhattacharji v. Emperor ...
ABU Jafar, The Hon'ble Raja— ... ...
Act (s) —
XXV of 1867 ... ... ... ... 1
XIX of 1876 ... ... ... ... 8
IV of 1898 ... ... ... ... I
V of 1898,— S. 108 ... ... ... 27
VI of 1908 ... .., ... ... 2y
VII of 1908 ... ... ... ... 85
XIV of 1908 ... ... ... ... 89
I of 1910 ... ... ... ... •?:>
X of 1911 ... ... ... ... 60
VIII of 1913 ... ... . . . 02
I of 1915, (so far as it relates to Ordinance I of 1914) (58
IV of 1915 ... ... ... ... 71,121
ADHIKARI, Surendra Narayan v. Emperor ... ^6
ADMINISTRATIVE Measures, Disapprobation of— ... 18
A1AVAR, H H. the Maharaja of— on Sedition ... 170, 183
AMAR Singh v. Crown ... ... ... 57
A MB A Parshad v. Emperor ... ... ... 20
AMENDMENT of the Press Act 1910. Resolution of the
Hon'ble Mr. S. N. Banerji for the— ... ... 199
AM RITA La! Hazra v. Emperor ... ... 33
AMRITSAR District, Application of Defence Act to— ... J27
AN AND A ijharlu, The IWble Mr. P.— .. 16
APPLICATION of Defence of India Act to—
Balasore ( Bihar and Orissa) .. ... 135
Benares (United Provinces) ... ... 135
Bengal ... ... ... ,.. 128
Punjab ... ... ... ... J27
APURBA Krishna Bose v Emperor ... ... 4.21
ARMY Rules under the Defence Act .. ... 123
ARUNOD^YA Press Case ... ... ... 38
A8AD Ali Khan, The Hon. Mr.— on the Press Act ... 215
BACKERGUN J, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 127
BALASORE, „ „ „ ... 135
BALGANGADHAR Tilak, Emperor v.— ... ... 20, 21, '22
B ALMOOK AND and others v. Crown ... ... 67
BANKRJI, The Hon'ble Mr. 8. N.— ... ... 87. 199
BANDE Mfjtaram Case. See Apurba Krishna Bose
BANGABASI Newspaper Case... ... ... 19
BAN K A Patni, Emperor v.— ... ... ... 2
11
BARENDRA Kumar Ghose and others v. Emperor ... 25
BARODA, His Highness the Maharaja of — on Sedition 159, 175
BARTABAHA (Kangapur) Case ... ... 24
BAWA Narain Singh v. Emperor ... ... 2
BENARES, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 135
BENGAL, „ „ „ ... 128
BENGAL Rules under the Defence Act ... ... 13*2
BEN I Bhusan Roy v. Emperor... ... ... 29
BERAR, Application of Rules under the Defence Act to — • 129
Application of the Naval and Emergency News
Ordinance to — ... ... ... 238
BHALA newspaper case ... ,,. ... 21
BH ASK A R, Emperor, u— ... ... ... 21
BHATTACHARJI, Abinas Chandra v. Emperor ... 21
EHAVANI Das, Emperor, v.— ... ... 2
BBOPAL, H. H. the Begam of— on Sedition ... 142, 174
BHUPENDRA Nath Bose, The Hon'ble Mr.— ... 60
BIKANER, His Highness the Maharaja of—on Sedition 162
BISH AM BAR Nath, The Hon'ble Mr,— ... ... 28
BOSE, Bhupendra Nath, The Hon'ble Mr.— .. 60
BUNDI, H. H. the Maharao Raja of Bundi— on Sedition 143
CHAKRAVARTI, Girija Sundar— , Case of— ... 38
„ Lalit Mohun— , „ ... 31
CHIDAMBARAM Pillai, Emperor, v.— ...
CHIEF Commissioner, Definition of — ... ... 57
CHIEF Court, Punjab, Rules upder the Press Acfc ..t 235
CHJTNAV1S. The Hon'ble Sir Gangadhar— ... 77, 234
CHITTAGONG, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
CIRCULATION oi mischievous reports ,., ... 18
CONFESSION by a Conspirator ... ,.. 43
CONSPIRACY, the Lahore— Case ... ,.. 135
The Deihi— „ ... ... 67
CONSPIRACY, Criminal— ... ... ... 65
CRADDOCK, The Hon'ble Sir Reginald— „. 73, 95, 219
CRIMINAL Conspiracy ... .., ... 65
CRIMINAL Law Amendment Act, 1908 ... ... 39
CRIMINAL Law Amendment Act, 1913 „. 64
CURRIMBHOY, The Hon'ble Sir Fazalbhoy— ... 79
DACCA, Application of i.he Defence Act to — ... 128
DADABHOY, The Hon'ble Mr.— ... ... 80, 110
DAS, The Hon'ble Mr. M. S.— ... .. 86,209
DECLARATIONS, Responsibility of— made by the
printers ... ... ... ... 4,51
DEFENCE of India Criminal Law Amendment Act ... 71
DEFENCE of India Act, Rules under the— .., 121
DELHI Conspiracy case - .,. ... ... 67
DEPtA Ghnzi Khan, Application of the Defence Act to — 127
DEWAS, H. H. the Raja of— on Sedicion .,. .., 145
DHAR, H. H. the Raja of-on Sedition ... ... 177
PflOLPUR, H. H. the Alaharaj Rana of Dholpur— on 155
Sedition ... ... .. ,
DHONDO Kashinath Phadke, Case of— ... ... 38
PIN AJ PUR, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
Ill
DISAFFECTION ... ... ... ... 18,20
DISAPPROBATION of administrative measures ... 18
DISLOYALTY is disaffection ... ... ... 18
DISSENTS, Minutes of— by the Hon'ble ...
MR. Ananda Charlu ... ... ... 15
„ Bhupendra Nath Basu ... ... 60
„ Bishambhar Nath ... ... ... 28
„ G. K. Gokhale ... ... ... 48, 60
„ , Lakebmishwar Singh ... ... ... 15
„ Madan Mohan Malaviya ... ... 50, 6$
„ Mazharul Haque ... ... ... 60
„ R. N. Mudholkar ... ... ... 48,60
„ R. M. Sayani ... ... ... 27
DRAMATIC Performances Act ... ... 8
DIJTT, Mr. R. Q— on Sedition .,. ... 160
EMERGENCY Ordinance ... ... ... 68
ENMITY between classes ... ... ... )8
EXPLOSIVES Substances Act ... ... 29
FARIDPUR, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
FEROZEPORE, „ „ „ ... 127
FULCHAND Bapuji, Emperor, -y.— ... ... 57
GANESH Balvant Modak, Emperor v,-~ ... .,. 22
GANESH Damodar Savarkar, Emperor, v.— ... 23
GHOSE, Manmohan — Case of — ,., .,. 23
GHULAM Kadir Khan, v. Crown ... 57 53
GHUZNAVI, The Hon'ble Mr.— ... ... ' 83
GIRIJA Sundar Chakravarti v. Emperor ... ... 38
GOKHALE, the Hon'ble Mr. G. K.— ... ... 48,60
GUJRAN WALA, Application of the Defence Act to— 127
GUPTA, Noni Gopal— Emperor, v. ... ... 43
GUllAKHI Newspaper Case ... ... ... 21
GURDASPUR District, Application of the Defence Act to — 127
GWALIOR, H. H. the Maharaja Scindia of— on Sedition 160, 173
HABLUL Matin Case ... ... ... 53
HANDWRITING, Expert Evidence on Methods of
proving ... ... ... ... 26
HAQUE. Mazharul, The Hon'ble Mr.— ... ... 60
HARDINGE, H. E Lord— ... .,. ., 71, 185, 188
HARI Shenoy v. Queen Empress ... ... 2
HIGH COURT, Calcutta, Judgment in the matter of
Mohamed Ali .,. ... .,. ... 139
HIND Swarajya Newspaper Case ... 94
HINDU Panch Case ... ... ... 33
HOOGHLY, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
HOSHIARPUR, „ „ „ ... 127
HOWRAH, „ „ ., ... 128
HYDERABAD, H. H. the Nizam of— on Sedition ... 137
JAICHAND, The Hon'ble Raja— ... ... 77
JAIPUR, H. H. the Maharaja of— on Sedition ... 173, 180
JALPAIGURI, Application of the Defence Act to-- ... 128
JAMMU and Kashmir, H. H. the Maharaja of— on
Sedition ... ... ... ... 154
JAORA, H, H. the Nawab of— on Sedition 148
IV
JHANG, Application of the Defence Act, to — ... 127
JODHPQn, Li. H. the Maharaja of— on Sedition ... 15H
JOG EN DR A Chandra Bose r. Empress ...' ... 19
JOG JIB AN Ghosh and others v. Emperor ... 32
JOY Chan/lra Sarkar v. Emperor ... ... 24
JUGANTARNewspaperCa.se... ... .. 21
JULLUNDUR, Application of the Defence Act to— .. 127
KANGRA, Application of the Defence Act to — .. 127
KARAJV1 Chand, Crown, v.— ... ... .. 57
KASHMIR; H. H. the Maharaja of— on Sedition .. 154-
K ARM A.I OGIN Newspaper Case ... .. 23
KENRICK, The Hon. Mr.— on Press Act ... .. 211
KES A RI Newspaper Case ... .. 21,23
KHAGENDKA Nath Ohaudhuri v. Emperor .. 34
KHULN A, Application of the Defence Act to— .. 128
KISHENGARH, H. H. the Maharaja of— on Sedition 151
KOTA, H. H. the Maharaja of — on Sedition ... 140
KU6HALPAL Singh, The Hon'ble Raja— ... 85
LAHORE* District, Application of Defence Act to— ... 127
LAH1RI, Surendra Prasad — v. Emperor ... ... 24
LAHORE Conspiracy Case ... ... ... 135
LAKSHMISHWAR Singh, The Hon'ble Mr.— ... 16
LALMOHAN Das and others v Pyarimoban Das ... 32
LAL1T Chandra Chanda Chaudhuri v. Emperor ... 31
„ Mohan Chakravarti and others, Emperor, v. — ... 44
L.AXM AN v. Queen Empress ... ... 21
LEGAL proof ... ... ... ... 26
LlAKAT ELusain and Abdul Ghafur v. Emperor ... 22
LOCAL Government, Definition of — ... ... 57
LOKANANDA, Rarnasami v.— ... ... 3
LUDHIANA, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 127
LYALLPUR, „ „ „ .. 127
MADAN Mohan Malaviya, The Hon'ble Pandit— 50, 64, 90, 216
MAHOMED ALI, Case of- ... ... ... 188
ai ALI K Umar Hyat Khan, The Hon. — on Press Ac' ... 204
MANICKTALA Bomb Case ... ... ... 25
MANINDRA Chandra Nandi, The Hon'ble Maharaja— 83
M AN MOHAN Ghosh v. Emperor ... ... 23
MAUNG Mye, The Hon'ble— ... ... ... 95
MAZtiARUL H*k and other? Pyarimohan Das, v.— ... 32
Haque, The Hon'ble Mr.— ... ... 60
MIDNAPUR, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
MILITARY Rules under the Defence Act... ... 123
MINTO, Lord— on Sedition .. ... ... 137
MISCHIE v OUS Reports, Circulation of— ... 19
MODAK, Ganesh Balvant— ... ... ... 22
MONTGOMERY Application of the Defence Act to—.. 127
MORAL conviction ... ... ... f.6
AIUDHOLKAK, The Hon'ble Mr. R. N.— ... 48
MUHAUAIAD Ali, [n re— ... ... 58, 189
Ali Muhammad Khan, The Hon'ble Raja Sir— 94
MULT AN, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 127
M CJZ AFFARG ARH, Application of the Defence Act to— 1 27
MYMENSINGH, „ „ „ 128
MYSORE, H. H. the Maharaja of— on Sedition ... 157
NASHIPUR, The Hon'ble Maharaja Ranjit Singh of— on
Press Act ... ... ... ... 206
NAVAL and Military News Ordinance ... ... 68, 238
NEWSPAPERS (Incitements to Offences) Act ... 35
NIZAM, H. H. the-^-on Sedition ... ... 137
NOAKHALI, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
NONI Gopal Gupta, Emperor, u— ... ... 43
ORCHHA, H. H. the Maharaja of— on Sedition ... 143
ORDINANCE I of 1914 ... ... ., 6.8
PALLICHITRA Case ... ... ... 43
PANDIT, The Hon. Mr. V. R.— on Sedition ... 216
PHANINDRA Nath Mitter, Emperor, v.— ... 4, 22
PRATOD Newspaper Case ... "... ... 20
PRESS Act ... ... ... ... 45,199
Rules of the Chief Court, Punjab, under the— ... 235
PRESS, Control of— during war ... ... 68
PROOF, Legal— ... ... ... ... 26
PUBNA, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
PREVENTION of Seditions Meetings Act ... 60
PULIN Bihari Das v. King Emperor ... ... 66
PUNJAB, Application of the Defence Act to the — ... 127
„ Rules under the Defence Act .. ... 130
PYARIMOHAN Das v. D. Weston and others ... 32
QUMARUL HUD A, The Hon. Mr.— on Press Act ... 207
RAHIMTOOLA, The Hon'ble Sir Ibrahim— ... 88, 229
RAJSHAHI, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
RAMASAMI v. Lokananda ... ... ... 3
RAMCHANDRA Narayan, Empress, v.— ... ... 20
KAMNATH v. Emperor ... .., ... 4
RAMPUR, H. H. the Nawab of— on Sedition ... 168
RANGPUR, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
„ Bartabaha Newspaper Case ... .. 24
RANAJIT SINGH, The Hon. Maharaja— on Press Act 206
RATLAM, H. R. the Raja of— on Sedition ... 149
RAY, The Hon'ble Rai Bahadur Sitauath— ... 82
RESOLUTION by the Hon. Mr. S. N. Banerjee to
Amend the Indian Press Act... ... ... 199
RAYANINGAR, The Hon'ble Mr.— ... ... 95, 208
REWAH, H. H, the Maharaja of— on Sedition ... 156
RIFAH-I-AM Press Case ... ... ... 58
ROY, Benibhushan v. Emperor ... ... 29
RULES under the Defence of India Act ... ... 121,129
SANTOSH Chandra Das and others v. Emperor ... 32
SANYAL, Suresh Chandra— v. Emperor ... ... 26
SARAT Chandra Mitra v. Emperor ... ... 38
SARKAR, Joy Chandra — v. Emperor ... ... 24
SATARA Case— See Pratod Case ... ... 20
SAVARKAR, Ganesh Damodar — Emperor, v. — ... 23
SCINDIA, H. H. the Maharaja of Gwalior— on Sedition 160, 173
VI
SECURITY for good behaviour... 27
SEDITION, Cases of- ... ... ... 19
SEDITION, Lord Minto's Letter to Ruling Chiefs, cm— 137
SEDITIOUS Meetings Act ... ... ... 60
SELECT Committees Reports on the
Bill to amend the Penal Code in Relation to Extra-
territorial Offences ... ... ... 12
Bill to Amend Criminal Procedure Code — S. 108 ... 27
Bill to provide for the Control of the Press ... 46
SHANKAR Srikrishna Dev, Emperor, v.— ... 2
SIALKOT, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 127
SITA Nath Ray, The Hon'ble Rai Bahadur— ... 85
SRI Ram, The Hon. Rai Bahadur— on Press Act ... 214
SUBRAMANIAPillai. Emperor v.— .... ... 25
SURENDRA Narayan Adhikary, Emperor, v.— ... 26
SURENDRA Nath Mukherji and others, Emperor, v.— 32
SURENDRA Prasad Lahiri, Emperor, v.— ... 24
SURKSH Chandra Sanyal, Emperor, u— ... ... 26
SWARAJ Defined ... ' ... ... ... 29
SWARAJ Newspaper Case ... ... ... 22
TEHRI, H. H. the 'Raja of— on Sedition ... .., 169
TIL AK, Balgangadhar— Emperor, v.— ... ... 20,22
TIPPERA, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
TONK, H. H. the Nawab of— on Sedition ... ... 147
TRIBHUVANDAS Purshottamdas Mangoole \rala, Em-
peror, v. — ... ... ... ... 24
24 PARGANAS, Application of the Defence Act to— ... 128
UDAIPUR, H. H. the Maharana of— on Sedition ... 153, 173
VAMAN, Emperor v.— ... ... ... 29
VINAYAK, Queen Empress, v.— ... .. 21
VIZIAHAGHAVACHARIAR, The Hon. Mr. Chakra
varti — on Press Act
WESTON, Donald— and others, Pyari Mohan Das v,-
YUGANTAR Newspaper Case ...
ZEMINDAR Press Case
231
32
21
68
I. THE INDIAN ARMS ACT MANUAL.
With Corrections up to the ist March 1916.
By G. K. Roy,
(RETIRED) SUPDT., GOVT. OF INDIA, HOME DEI'T.
Price Rs. 7.
The book has been published with the permission of tin-
Government of India and the Govts. of Bengal, Punjab, Bihur <uul
Orissa, the Chief Comrs. of the N.-W. F, Province, Baluchistan juul i
have sanctioned^he purchase of copies by Commissioners, District M.
rates and Police-officers in their respective provinces. Also approved? TDV
the Chief Court, Punjab.
Select Opinions
Sir Lawrence Jenkins, O.J., K.C.I.E.— A useful commentary on the subject.
Justice Harrington.— I have no doubt it will form a very useful addition t<»
my Library.
Justice Holmwood.—** Excellent compilation.**
Justice Fletcher.— Thank you for being so good as to send me vour useful
Manual on the Indian Arms Act.
Sir John Stanley, Kt.. K.C.— **It will be a useful publication.
Sir George Knox, Kt.— It is very well got up and so far as I had leisure to
examine it, it will, I think, prove useful to all who have to consult the Act. '
Sir Henry Richards, Kt., K. C.--I am sure I shall find it most useful.
Sir Arthur Reid, C. J.— Will be very useful to Bench and Bar and to tin-
Public.
The Hon'We Mr. Justice Rattigan. — I am sure I shall find it most useful.
Sir Harold Stuart, K.C.V.O., K.C.J.B.— The compilation should prove very
useful to all who have to administer the Arms Act and the Rules under it.
The Hon'ble Mr. S. W. Gracey, I.C.S., Legal Remembrancer, Punjab. — Your
work has been regularly used by me for reference and I find it of great help.
T.P. Ellis Esq., I.C.S.—l have always found your first Edition of gi
assistance when reference was necessary, and I do not doubt the second Edition
has maintained the same qualities.
The Poineer. — To students of the Arms legislation of India and its varia-
tions and developments, the Indian Arms Act Manual compiled by Mr. G. K.
Roy should prove useful.
The Civil and Militrij Gazette.— **The whole book forms a valuable com-
pendium of the law relating to Arms in India and its usefulness may be judged
by the fact that a large number of copies of the Urdu Edition have been pur-
chased for the use of Police officers in the Punjab and the N. W. P. Province.
Allahabad Laiv Journal. — **The compilation is a very useful one and tin-
editor has done his work well, having noted carefully the Killings of tin/ din
High Courts and the Chief Courts of the Punjab. We have no doubt that practis-
ing lawyers will find in Mr. Hoy's Manual all that they may want to know
about the subject.
II. The Second List of Corrections to the-
INDIAN ARMS ACT MANUAL, SECOND EDITION.
C.'oiuaining amendments to the Anns Rultss up to the 1st March, 1
Price Be. 1-0-0.
Hardinge Printing Press, Lahore.
III. LAW RELATING TO PRESS AND SEDITION,
By the same author. — Price Rs. 5.
The publication contain^ : IM. -s mid Registration of Books Act, Dramatic
Let, Indian IVnnl Code Amendment Act, Sec. 108 of the Criminal,
ve Substances Act, Newspaper (Incitements td|
Criminal Law Amendment Act, Fndian Press Act, Prevention ol
Act, Indian Ci-iininalLaw Amendment Act, The Naval ;
Ordinance I nMiil I, Defence of India (Criminal Law Amendment
l!U.~>, with Proceedings <>t' the Council of the Governor-General and
Rules issued under the Act ; Letter, from Lot4 l(iatO to Ruling Chiefs and
their Replies; Calcutta High Court, judgment in the matter of Muhammad
Ali andpnx • >n he Council of the ( Governor-General on the Resolutioil
by tin- Hon'Me Mr. S. N. Hunerjee on 1 he 9th January 1914.
CHIEF COURT OF THE PUNJAB.
Correction Slip, No. :>!(>, dated the Kith December 1915.
To part V of List A, issued with th<- ChiVf Court, Genera! letter No. 3914-0.,
d iMtli .lime 191"), add the following :
relating to Press and Sedition," By. G. K. ROY.
Select Opinions.
;1<1 Craihi. k on the Law relating lo Press and >•
your care and industry.
- • Harold Stuart K.C.V.O.. K.< J.K.. l.C.S.y IT is :i most useful Compilation
us much interesting matter not </.
from a cursory glance through the
• has been trout < .'id exhaustively, and I have no doubt I shall find the
il.
Din. - * * * I have !io doubt thai it wilTprove \
Hench and to the Bar.
summary of the law in small
• * * I sha'.. is trustworthy and r
ery well put together an
•i ne. * *It .• 12; lawyers, poik-e and ;
ihey may \ -.\v about * * *
•k is that in naai
should prove of great helj-
- to this publication will be supplied at t]ie r-'ie ot <
copy, p'-r year.
IV. THli INDIAN COPVUIC'.HT ACT AND REGULATIONS,
L, AND LAWS RELATING TO THE PRESS IN INDIA.
By the same author.- Price Rs. 2.
rs. — "Tlit! I'ir.ss and 1 \egisrrat i » -i of !*ooks ACL. XXV oi
!io Iiuli.. .iglit Act ;uid Re^alrtt,i«r.is, I'.'H. i 3 i The
s), Ac; \'H Of 1908, ( -ium IV
om judgments on— (//) u The run;';t!
)inr;i(le" c;i oinruile and I!;na<-
• Xiuuiiiilur" < >rdiii
VVa . Approved by the Chief Court, Punjab.
>F Rt.'LES AND ORDERS RELATING "i
TO PUBLIC SERVAN'!
,a to their Dismissal; Rules for suhn, <>f Petitions,
Appeals, and other Communications t<« the Government of India
Authorities in England, etc. (Third ! in the P)\
By the same author. Price Rs. 2.
«J1 Oj'licrrs in tljeir respoc-
\ of Iioinbjiy . 1'xMigal ji?ul the Punjab, and
I D(>lhi :iiul K«;v. Comr. in
Approved "by tUe Chief Court,Pu»ja'b.
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY
PN Roy, Gouri Kant
4748 Law relating to press and
I5R68 sedition
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11