§ Sir HENRY COTTONasked the Under-Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the evidence of Mr. Hastings, C.I.E., Inspector-General of Police in the Punjab, before the Decentralisation Commission, in the course of which he said that since the inauguration of the Imperial Department of Criminal Intelligence we seemed to be on the verge of constituting a secret police force, and that no innovation could be more dangerous and more liable to become a weapon of oppression with the material we are obliged to work through; whether, in connection with this evidence, his attention has been drawn to the recent judgment of a special tribunal of the Calcutta High Court acquitting four prisoners in the Barrah dacoity case on the 205 ground that improper influences had been employed on the witnesses for the prosecution and severely commenting on the character and methods of the detective police; and whether, having regard to this and similar cases which have lately occurred, he will cause inquiry to be made with a view of introducing drastic reform into the Department of Criminal Intelligence?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe Secretary of State has seen the evidence referred to in the question; he has received no official report of the judgment. The matter will no doubt receive the attention of the Government of India, and the Secretary of State does riot think it is necessary to order an inquiry.
§ Mr. REESAre not the rank and file of the police so comprehensively condemned by the hon. Member as oppressive and untrustworthy natives of India, and is any drastic reform possible other than the substitution of European for native agency at prohibitive cost?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI can hardly be expected to answer all that. Undoubtedly it, is a fact that the rank and file are natives of India, and also that an increase of European officers would cause very great additional expense.
§ Mr. LUPTONDoes not this question refer to secret police, and not the police in general?
§ Sir HENRY COTTONasked the Under-Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the circumstances of a case reported from Bahraich, in the United Provinces, in which innocent landholders were convicted of dacoity on false evidence manufactured by the police; whether a police inspector concerned in this case confessed his guilt and then committed suicide to avoid the humiliation of arrest and punishment; and whether the facts of this case will be borne in mind in considering the necessity of introducing drastic reform into the organisation of the Criminal Investigation Department in India?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe Secretary of State has no official information as to the case referred to. If the facts are as stated, the matter will no doubt receive the attention of the Government of India.
§ Mr. REESMay I ask whether the inspector of police who oppressed the innocent landholders was a native of India, and whether drastic reforms can be introduced 206 in any other way than by increasing the European agency at the expense of the natives?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI cannot say without obtaining information.
§ Sir HENRY COTTONasked the Under-Secretary whether the authorities in India, in directing the arrest and imprisonment without charge or trial of Krishna Kumar Mater, Aswini Kumar Dutt, and seven other persons in November last, acted upon information supplied to them by police officers of the Criminal Investigation Department?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe Secretary of State is not prepared to make any statement as to the nature of the information on which the Government of India acted; but it is hardly necessary to say that it was drawn from more than one source, and was corroborated in various ways.
§ Sir HENRY COTTONWas it not primarily based on the information supplied by the Criminal Investigation Department?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe Secretary of State is not prepared to make any statement as to the nature of the information. It does not serve the case in which the hon. Member is interested by putting supplementary questions trying to elicit information which I am unable to give.
§ Mr. SWIFT MacNEILLIs the Secretary of State able to make any statement whatever in reference to any matter about India?