§ MR. WEIR (Ross and Cromarty)To ask the Secretary of State for India if 188 he will state what expenditure was incurred by the Government of Bombay in the prosecution of Mr. Tilak; and, having regard to the fact that the action resulted in a complete acquittal, will he state on whose advice the prosecution was undertaken.
§ MR. SCHWANN (Manchester, N.)To ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to the strictures pronounced by the Chief Justice of Bombay on the criminal proceedings taken under the sanction of Government against Mr. Tilak for forgery and perjury; whether he is aware that this prosecution, which ended in an acquittal by the High Court, lasted over one and a half years, at a cost to the Government of about a half lakh of rupees; whether he will state who are the persons responsible for the prosecution and what notice is being taken of their conduct; and what compensation will be paid to Mr. Tilak.
(Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) My attention has been drawn to the judgment of the Chief Justice of Bombay, as reported in the newspapers, overruling the judgment of the Court below, which had been adverse to Mr. Tilak. I have no official information on the subject, but I understand that the proceedings were instituted, not by Government, but by the direction of a district Judge, who considered that Mr. Tilak had given false evidence in a case that was tried before him. This direction he had power to give under Section 476 of the Criminal Procedure Code; and the fact that the Court of Final Appeal took a different view of Mr. Tilak's conduct does not appear primâ facie to be a ground for compensation.