HC Deb 11 June 1928 vol 218 cc604-6
5. Mr. THURTLE

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is now in a position to make any statement regarding the circumstances in which K. C. Banerjee, who had been sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment under the Arms Act, was released by the Punjab Government after serving some months of this term of imprisonment; whether he is aware that the Punjab Government has admitted that they had learned that this man had been connected with the criminal investigation department of the United Provinces; and that his release followed on the receipt of this information?

Earl WINTERTON

My Noble Friend has not yet received any report on this matter, but it was debated at some length in the Punjab Legislative Council on 10th May, and the debate has been reported in the Indian Press. When I receive the Official Report will send the hon. Member a copy. According to the Press report it is the case that Banerjee was released after serving two months of his sentence mainly in consideration of the fact that he had in the past given useful information to the United Provinces police and had assisted in the prevention and detection of crime.

Mr. THURTLE

In view of that statement, will the Noble Lord now reconsider the replies which he has given in this House to the effect that agents provocateurs are not employed by the Indian police?

Earl WINTERTON

No; the hon. Gentleman is reading into my answer something that does not exist. I never suggested that he was an agent provocateur, and there is not the slightest reason to suppose that he is. He was merely a gentleman who had given useful information to the police; and I would remind the hon. Member that it is the duty of all citizens in all civilised countries to give information to the police, if that information may be useful.

Mr. THURTLE

Is the Noble Lord aware that the Finance Member of the Punjab Government admitted that this man had been a paid agent of the police?

Earl WINTERTON

The report which I have seen in the newspapers did not convey that impression. Sir Geoffrey de Montmorency, according to the report, said: This informer belonged to the latter class"— that is, those, as Sir Geoffrey had previously explained, who give really useful information leading to the detection and prevention of crime, and the protection of the public, and, as such, deserve consideration. Then, Sir Geoffrey went on to say: and we, therefore, took a lenient view of his offence, but we did not take this view until we were thoroughly satisfied on the point.

Mr. SAKLATVALA

Did not the fact come out in the same debate that his expenses were always paid by the police authoriti as, and is it not a fact that his expenses for travelling to Punjab were actually paid?

Earl WINTERTON

On that, I should prefer to await the full report of the debate, but I must inform the hon. Gentleman that I see nothing wrong in a citizen, who has given useful information to the police, being paid for his expenses in connection with the matter.