§ Mr. O'GRADY
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 1317 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?
§ Mr. MONTAGU
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.