§ 21. Sir J. D. REESasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the accused in the Faridpur dacoity case were students or sons or relatives of local lawyers of position, were released on bail, and so had the opportunity of terrorising the witnesses against them so that the latter feared to come forward; whether such terrorism was reported to the Sub-divisional Court, notwithstanding which the bail bonds of the offenders were thrice cancelled and renewed; whether this result, coming after others of the like nature, has produced the impression that the Government of Bengal makes little effort to repress crime which assumes a political cloak; and whether the Secretary of State proposes to take any and, if so, what steps to deal with the situation?
§ Mr. C. ROBERTSThe Secretary of State is awaiting a full report, but the information in his possession makes it clear that the suggestion as to any remissness on the part of the Government of Bengal in this and other similar prosecutions is as unfounded as it is mischievous.
§ Sir J. D. REESArising out of the answer to this question, may I ask when it is the function of a Minister to answer questions, whether he is in order in discouraging such questions as he may not like by describing them as "mischievous "?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI do not know what to say in answer to the hon. Member. I will take time to consider.