§ MR. W. S. CAINEI beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if his attention has been called to an official inquiry into the complaint of Taran Chunder Bose v. Aijuddy and others, held at Faridpore, and reported in the Indian journals of 24th April; is he aware that it is stated in the official report that the said Taran Chunder Bose charged Aijuddy and two others with robbery before the Deputy Magistrate, who submitted to the District Magistrate that the evidence justified a prosecution; that the District Magistrate not only refused to prosecute Aijuddy and his accomplices, but ordered that Taran Chunder Bose should be prosecuted under section 211, I.P.C., for instituting a false case; that, on application to the 82 High Court by Taran Chunder Bose, this order was not only set aside, but the District Magistrate was ordered to send up Aijuddy and his fellow-robbers for trial at the sessions; that eventually the persons accused of robbery were all convicted, and the conviction was upheld by the High Court on appeal; and whether, in view of the fact that the District Magistrate who refused to prosecute was the same gentleman who, as District Magistrate at Balladhun, was severely censured by the Calcutta High Court, and afterwards by the Viceroy in Council, for his conduct in the Balladhun murder case, he proposes to take any action in the matter?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. HENRY FOWLER, Wolverhampton)My attention has not been called to this case, but my hon. Friend has favoured me with an extract from the newspaper on which he relies. I am not in a position to say whether the statements contained in that newspaper are correct, but I will refer the allegations to the Government of India, who are the proper authority to deal with matters of this description.