HC Deb 09 March 1925 vol 181 cc899-900
5. Mr. LANSBURY

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to the trial which took place at Cawnpore, from 22nd April to 9th May, 1924, of four Indians accused of sedition whether he is aware that the trial took place before the Sessions Judge sitting with three Indian assessors; that one of the assessors found two of the accused, Usmani and Ahmad, guilty, and two of them, Dange and Gupta, not guilty; that the second assessor found only one of the accused, Usmani, guilty, and the other three not guilty; that the third assessor found all the accused not guilty, and that the Sessions Judge, delivering judgment on 20th May, 1924, agreeing with two assessors and differing with the third regarding Usmani, agreeing with one assessor and differing with the other two regarding Ahmad, and differing with the three assessors regarding Dange and Gupta, convicted all four accused men, and sentenced each of them to four years' rigorous imprisonment; and whether he will state what are the status and functions of Indian assessors in a trial of this nature?

Earl WINTERTON

The status and functions of assessors who are not jurors or members of the Bench are described in Chapter XXIII of the Indian Code of Criminal Procedure (Act No. V of 1898), in particular Sections 284, 235 and 309 The Judge is bound to record the opinion of each assessor, but in giving his judgment, it is provided, "he shall not be bound to conform to the opinions of the assessors."

Mr. LANSBURY

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the case of a trial for murder the Lord Chief Justice sentenced an Englishman to 12 months' imprisonment for murder, and that three men were sentenced to these terms of rigorous imprisonment for writing letters?

Earl WINTERTON

I do Lot see that that has anything to do with the question. I must respectfully be excused from commenting either favourably or adversely on judicial decisions come to by the High Court.

Mr. LANSBURY

They happen to be coloured men in one case and white men in another. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]