The Bande Mataram case

WE do not have before us the full text of the judgment delivered by the Senior Subordinate Judge, Multan, in the Bande Mataram libel suit. However, the summary of the judgment which we published in our yesterday’s issue makes it abundantly clear that though technically speaking the plaintiff, RS Jamnadas, has obtained a decree against the defendant, for all practical purposes, the victory lies with the latter, because the judge holds that the “graver portions of the libel have been proved to be true and that the portion which is not proved to be true does not constitute libel of a grave nature.” As to most of the specific allegations of maltreatment of prisoners in the Multan jail, the judge holds them to have been proved by overwhelming evidence. This is what he says in his judgment: “More than 20 witnesses have deposed to the ‘kan parade’, which is the term applied by witnesses to the punishment of ear-holding with shoe-beating; and out of them, more than a dozen speak from their own experience. One of the plaintiff’s own witnesses, Allah Yar, admits that if a prisoner did not do labour, he was made to hold his ears. He also deposes that ears were sometimes held in an erect position and sometimes under the legs. Gidar Kut is deposed by 58 witnesses, out of whom more than half speak from experience. It is the term applied to denote indiscriminate beating with fists, kicks, etc. inflicted on prisoners by the lambardars (head convicts). There is perhaps a little exaggeration in the description given of the punishment in the paper; but the evidence proves the allegations to be correct in all material particulars.”