HC Deb 14 November 1927 vol 210 cc597-9
1 and 2. Mr. LANSBURY

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India (1) whether he is aware that His Highness the Maharaja of Nabha has applied to the Government of India, as well as the Government of the Punjab, for passports for himself, his wife the Maharanee, his son the heir apparent, and his other children, to proceed to Europe; whether he is aware that, although a considerable time has elapsed, the passports have not yet been granted; and whether he will instruct the Government of India to issue the passports without further delay;

(2) whether he is aware that His Highness the Maharaja of Nabha was prevented from attending the sessions of the Central Sikh League in Hoshiapur (the Punjab) owing to a Government ban against his entering the Punjab; how long this ban has been in operation; what is the reason; and whether he will advise the Government of India to have the ban lifted?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Earl Winterton)

It was one of the conditions, subject to which the Maharaja of Nabha was permitted in 1923 to sever his connection with the administration of Nabha State, that he would not visit the Punjab or leave India except with the previous permission of the Government of India and subject to such conditions as they might impose. My Noble Friend is not prepared to take any action in the direction suggested in the questions.

Mr. LANSBURY

May I have an answer to the first question as to passports?

Earl WINTERTON

The restrictions which were accepted by the Maharaja of Nabha at the time of the original decision, by which he gave up the effective administration of the State, included the condition that he should not leave India.

Mr. LANSBURY

Is it intended that this gentleman shall remain in India for the rest of his days and not be allowed to leave, and will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House why?

Earl WINTERTON

It would be impossible in answer to a question to give all the reasons—they were very fully stated in 1923, I think it was in July of that year—which led the Government of India to take the action they did. There had been very serious scandals in the administration of the Nabha State— scandals of a character which, I think, no hon. Member on either side of the House can possibly support—and, as a result, certain conditions were accepted by the Maharaja, one of which was that he should give up the administration of the State, although he should retain his title. This particular provision that he should not leave India was one of those conditions. I can only add that the conduct of the Maharaja since those restrictions were accepted by him has not been such as to encourage the Government to agree to their removal.

Mr. LANSBURY

Is it not a fact that the Maharaja flatly contradicts this statement that he voluntarily accepted the position in which he finds himself, and is it not a fact that he has an income in excess of the Viceroy's income? [Interruption.] I ask the right hon. Gentleman because I want to find out why he should be entitled to this sum of money that he gets, seeing that he is unfit to administer the State?

Earl WINTERTON

I do not see any possible relevance between the income of the Maharaja of Nabha and his projected visit to Europe. I can only add, as I have already stated very clearly, and, I hope, simply, that the Government of India are not prepared to relax the restrictions which they imposed.

Mr. LANSBURY

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay on the Table of the House of Commons the evidence on which this man was convicted of the offences the Noble Lord charges against him, so that this House may itself decide whether the Indian Government are acting justly towards him in preventing him from leaving the country.

Earl WINTERTON

The conditions which were imposed and accepted by the Maharaja occurred four years ago. A State communique was then issued by the Government of India. I am perfectly willing to give the hon. Member a copy of the communique. I am not going to impose the expense upon the public funds of publishing it now after four years. The hon. Gentleman asked a question about it at the time. I am quite willing to supply him with a copy.

Back to