HC Deb 06 July 1911 vol 27 cc1316-7

asked the Under-Secretary for India whether his attention has been drawn to the case of one Charu Chunder Ghose, who, although he was in a bad state of health, was arrested on 20th March, 1910, on the charge of being implicated in the Hourah gang case and detained in gaol, bail being refused; who-was released on bail on the report of the medical officer of the gaol on the 19th May; who was again taken into custody on the 20th July, but was released on bail by order of the High Court on the 24th September; who was placed on trial before the special tribunal of the High Court on the 2nd December; who was so ill during the trial that the judges, notwithstanding the objection of the counsel for the Crown, exempted him from personal attendance; who died on the 17th April, 1911, and regarding whom the Chief Justice, in a judgment recorded on the 19th April, stated that a very careful consideration of the evidence had led him to the clear conclusion that Ghose was innocent of the charge brought against him; and whether, having regard to these facts and the further fact that Charu Chunder Ghose was the bread-winner of his family and has left two young children and a mother who were dependent on him for support, he will take his case into favourable consideration and grant some compassionate allowance for the maintenance of his family?


The Secretary of State is awaiting fuller papers from the Government of India, and has now telegraphed to expedite them. In the meantime I would refer the hon. Member to the answer to his question of the 18th May. The suggestion that the failure of a Crown prosecution imposes a duty on the State to compensate the person acquitted is, I think, a novel proposition.