by Paul Scott
‘Washing.’
‘Where?’
‘In the compound. Under a tap.’
‘Getting rid of a thick head?’
‘Yes.’
‘Let me read from the report: “On being asked in Urdu what his name was Kumar affected not to understand any Indian language. Mrs Ludmila Smith then said – ‘Mr Kumar, these are the police. They are looking for someone. It is their duty to question anyone they find here for whom I cannot personally vouch. I cannot personally vouch for you because all I know of you is that you were found by us last night unconscious from drink.’ Kumar then made a gesture of defiance. The DSP addressed him directly as follows: ‘Is that your name, then – Kumar?’ To which Kumar replied, ‘No, but it will do.’ DSP then directed his sub-inspector to escort Kumar to the police truck. No evidence being found at The Sanctuary in regard to the escaped prisoner Moti Lal, DSP proceeded to the kotwali at the Mandir Gate bridge and formally questioned the man Kumar.” Is that an accurate record of the events as you remember them?’
‘Broadly. I don’t remember a gesture of defiance unless I shrugged. And the report omits to mention that the sub-inspector raised his hand to hit me and would have done so if Sister Ludmila hadn’t objected in the strongest terms to any violence being shown by anyone in her presence, on her private property.’
‘Why did you say “No, but it will do” when DSP asked if your name was Kumar?’
‘He pronounced it incorrectly. There was too much stress on the last syllable. And I was still in the habit of thinking of myself as Coomer, which is how we spelt the name at home. I mean, how we spelt it in England.’
‘Weren’t you being unnecessarily obtuse?’
‘Not unnecessarily. Merrick spoke to me as if I were a lump of dirt. I wasn’t in the mood for that. I had a hangover, to begin with.’
‘At The Sanctuary, then, you admit you weren’t in the mood – as you put it – to answer fairly and squarely questions put to you by the police in the course of their duty?’
‘The course of their duty didn’t automatically give them permission to treat me like a lump of dirt. In my view.’
‘When you got to the kotwali, however, you became more co-operative?’
‘I answered questions as soon as Merrick explained why he’d brought me in.’
‘You mean the District Superintendent.’
‘To me he was always Merrick. We came to have a special personal association.’
‘What do you mean?’
‘It will become clear if you ask enough questions about my various interrogations.’
‘At the kotwali it was explained that the police were looking for an escaped prisoner – one Moti Lal – who had lived in Mayapore and was thought possibly to have come back and gone into hiding there. It so happened that although the DSP didn’t know when he took you in for questioning that you knew this man, Moti Lal, you in fact did know him, and had to admit it when questioned.’
‘Again admit seems to me to be the wrong word. I’d met Moti Lal because he was once employed by Romesh Chand Gupta Sen in the office of the warehouse in the railway sidings. I also knew Moti Lal had been sacked. Romesh Chand disliked his employees being politically active. He thought all their energies should be devoted to their work. I knew that sometime after he was sacked Moti Lal was sent to prison for subversive activities. I was in the District and Sessions court when he was brought up for his appeal. I didn’t know he had escaped. And I didn’t know the man at all – apart from what I’ve just told you.’
‘Didn’t you know that Moti Lal had been a very popular figure among young men like Vidyasagar?’
‘One couldn’t help knowing. One knew of Moti Lal’s popularity just as one knew of Pandit Baba’s.’
‘We now come to more detailed consideration of the names in group two. In group one there were Pandit Baba and Vidyasagar. In group two there are six names. The first is Moti Lal, who at the time of your arrest under suspicion of criminal assault was still apparently unapprehended as an escaped prisoner. The five other men are Narayan Lal, Nirmal Bannerjee, Bapu Ram, Puranmal Mehta and Gopi Lal. According to police records these men were all intimates of Vidyasagar’s. And according to your testimony at least three of them were your drinking companions with Vidyasagar on the occasion in February after the cricket match on the maidan. You would in fact agree that you had some kind of relationship with all the men in the two groups – however passing a relationship you may judge it to have been?’
‘Yes.’
‘With the exception of Pandit Baba, these were all young men whom you would describe, more or less, as ardent nationalists who looked forward to an early end to a British controlled administration?’
‘They were all young men – Indians – therefore they would almost inevitably look forward to that.’
‘After the night you drank with a certain number of them, would you say that you became more directly aware of their political desires and affiliations?’
‘No.’
‘Did you not in fact become privy to their political activities?’
‘I never assumed that they ever did more than talk politics.’
‘For what purpose then would you imagine they got together?’
‘To drink bad liquor and exist for a while in a state of euphoria.’
‘Are you aware that a couple of days after your arrest in August nineteen forty-two Vidyasagar was arrested in the act of distributing seditious pamphlets?’
‘Yes. Merrick told me. He said Vidyasagar had confessed to acts of sedition and had implicated me as the leader of a plot to attack Miss Manners.’
‘What was your reaction to that?’
‘I didn’t believe he had implicated me.’
‘But you believed he had confessed to acts of sedition?’
‘It didn’t surprise me. The whole of Mayapore was by then engaged in such acts – or so one gathered.’
‘You insist that neither before nor after the occasion when you drank home-made hooch with Vidyasagar and his friends were you involved in any way with their political activities.’
‘Yes, I insist that.’
‘But you saw quite a bit of them? I mean after the night you got drunk?’
‘If anything I saw less.’
‘How was that?’
‘I’ve already said. I had become friendly with Miss Manners.’
‘From a time towards the end of February or the beginning of March, until August, in nineteen forty-two, your social life became more or less exclusively involved with your friendship with Miss Manners.’
‘It was the first time I’d had a social life. So it did not become exclusively involved with that.’ A pause. ‘And the date is wrong. It was from February or March until towards the end of July. At the time of my arrest on August 9th I had not seen Miss Manners since the night we went to the temple. About three weeks previously.’
‘So you always insisted. But let us concentrate on these men, other than Moti Lal and Vidyasagar. And of course other than Pandit Baba. That leaves us with Narayan Lal, Nirmal Bannerjee, Bapu Ram, Puranmal Mehta and Gopi Lal. You say that you knew them as among Vidyasagar’s friends but that if anything you saw less of them after the night you got drunk. I want you now to tell me about the last occasion you saw them. When was that?’
‘I saw them last on the night of my arrest as a suspect in the criminal assault on Miss Manners.’
‘In what circumstances?’
‘They had also been arrested. I was taken through the room in which they were held.’
‘Taken through a room at police headquarters?’
‘Yes.’
‘You were taken through the room as distinct from lodged in it?’
‘I was in the room for about half a minute.’
‘Did you speak to them?’
‘No.’
‘Did they speak to you?’
‘One of them said, Hello, Hari.’
‘You didn’t reply?’
‘No.’
‘Why?’
‘They were behind the bars of a cell in the room.’
‘What was their demeanour?’
‘They were laughing and joking.’
‘And you were not?’
‘No. I was not.’
‘What happened then?’
‘I was handed over by the two policemen who held me to two other policemen and taken to a room downstairs.’
‘So you saw those five men in a cell on the night of August the ninth and recognized them all?’
‘I recognized about three of them in the sense of being able to put a name to the face.’
‘All the faces were familiar as men you knew but you didn’t immediately recall all their names.’
‘That is right.’
‘You remembered all the names later?’
‘No.’
‘Please elucidate.’
‘I was told the names.’
‘By whom?’
‘By District Superintendent Merrick.’
‘Your memory is clear on that point, that District Superintendent Merrick told you the names of the men in the cell?’
‘Yes.’
‘He read out a list of names?’
‘Yes.’
‘And asked you whether you were acquainted with the men?’
‘No.’
‘No? What then?’
‘He read out the list of names. Then he made a statement.’
‘What was the statement?’
‘He said: These men are all friends of yours and as you saw we have them under lock and key.’
‘What did you say?’
‘I said nothing.’
‘Why?’
‘It wasn’t a question.’
‘On reconsideration would you not agree with a statement to the effect that “when asked whether he knew the five other men in custody and with whom he had been confronted the prisoner refused to answer"?’
‘No.’
‘Would you not agree with the following statement? Upon being told dates and times and circumstances when he had been seen in the company of one or several of the other prisoners the prisoner Kumar refused any comment beyond the words: I have nothing to say.’
‘Yes. I would agree with that.’
‘Why did you have nothing to say?’
‘I refused to comment on any statement because I didn’t know what I was being charged with.’
‘When did you ask what you were being charged with?’
‘When I was taken into custody.’
‘At number 12 Chillianwallah Bagh?’
‘Yes.’
‘Not at police headquarters?’
‘I asked first in my room at 12 Chillianwallah Bagh. I asked again at police headquarters. I asked several times.’
‘When were you first told?’
‘After I’d been in custody for about an hour.’
Gopal suddenly interrupted. ‘Please recollect carefully. Would it not be more accurate to say something to this effect’: He glanced at his file and read out: ‘At 22.45 hours the prisoner Kumar, having continually refused to answer questions relating to his activities that evening asked for what reason he had been taken into custody. Upon being told it was believed he could help the police with inquiries they were making into the criminal assault on an Englishwoman in the Bibighar Gardens earlier that evening he said: I have not seen Miss Manners since the night we visited the temple. On being asked why he named Miss Manners he refused to answer and showed signs of distress.’
‘No,’ Kumar said, ‘it would not be more accurate.’
‘In what way is that statement inaccurate in your view?’ Gopal asked.
‘I may have asked at 22.45 hours why I was taken into custody but it wouldn’t have been for the first time. I asked several times. It was probably at 22.45 hours when the District Superintendent finally told me. But it didn’t happen in the way it’s written down there. He said he was making inquiries about an Englishwoman who was missing. His words were: “An Englishwoman, you know which one.” He then made an obscene remark.’
‘Let us be quite clear,’ Gopal continued. ‘According to you the investigating officer did not say “We believe you can help us with inquiries we’re making into the criminal assault on an Englishwoman in the Bibighar Gardens” – to which you replied “I haven’t seen Miss Manners since the night we visited the temple".’
‘No. It wasn’t like that. He made the obscene remark and followed it with another.’
‘Are you saying it was from these remarks that you gathered who the Englishwoman was and what had happened to her?’
‘I’m not saying what I gathered, only what was said to me.’
‘Are you saying that what was said to you accounted for what is described as your distress?’
‘I don’t know what he meant by distress.’
Gopal said: ‘Then how would you describe your demeanour at this stage of your interview at police headquarters?’
Kumar looked down at the table. Presently he said, ‘I was shivering. It would have been noticeable.’
‘Shivering?’
‘The interview was in a private room in the basement. It was air-conditioned.’
‘This room is air-conditioned. You are not shivering now, are you?’
‘No.’
‘Why were you shivering on that occasion?’
‘I had no clothes on. I had had no clothes on for nearly an hour.’
‘No clothes?’ Gopal asked. ‘You were asked questions by a police officer in a state of undress?’
She was observing the hollow-cheeked face intently. A tremor passed over it. It might have been a smile.
‘The police officer who asked the questions was fully dressed,’ Kumar said. ‘But I was naked.’
‘That is what I said,’ Gopal snapped. ‘Why were you naked?’
‘I had been stripped. My clothes were piled on the table.’
‘I meant for what purpose were you stripped?’
‘Originally for inspection I believe.’
‘A physical examination?’
‘Inspection would be more accurate. There was no doctor present.’
‘Gopal said, ‘No doctor? Then who carried out the examination?’
‘The District Superintendent.’
Gopal hesitated, then said, ‘What kind of examination was it?’
‘An inspection of my genitals. Doesn’t it say so in the reports? He inspected my genitals for signs of blood.’
‘Did he tell you that?’
‘No. But it was obvious.’
‘How?’
‘When he’d finished he said: “So you’ve been intelligent enough to wash, we almost caught you at it, didn’t we?” Later he said: “Well, she wasn’t a virgin, was she, and you were the first to ram her?” So it was obvious the inquiry was about a woman who’d been assaulted.’
Captain Rowan interrupted: ‘All this is, in a sense, irrelevant to the purpose of the inquiry. I should like to return to the main line of questioning,’ but Gopal shook his head and said:
‘All this is most important. It has a direct bearing on the detenu’s statement that he was not immediately informed of the reason for being in custody and a direct bearing on the question of his distress as recorded. The impression I am getting here is that the physical examination and the references to other physical matters occurred before 22.45 hours. Hitherto the official suggestion has been that until then questions were asked in an ordinary line of interrogation and not answered and then at 22.45 hours the detenu was told the reason for the inquiries, appeared to incriminate himself by naming the woman and then showed signs of distress.’
‘Perhaps,’ Captain Rowan began, but she had pressed the button under the chair arm. The green light flicked on. Captain Rowan lifted his receiver as she lifted hers.
‘Hello: Rowan here—’
‘I have a question to ask – and something to say—’
‘Does Mr Gopal know I’m listening? He glanced up at the grille when he came into the room.’
Rowan waited before replying, as if his caller had asked a longer question.
‘The answer to that – the official answer – is no. But in that particular case I’m not sure. I’m in the middle of an examination. Is it urgent?’
‘What I wanted to say is forget that I am here. You have your job to do. I don’t want you to worry about trying to spare me from hearing unpleasant things.’
‘Very well. I’ll attend to it.’
‘One other thing—’
‘Yes?’
‘Does Mr Kumar know that my niece is dead?’
‘I’m not sure.’
‘I should like to be sure.’
‘Very well, and thank you. Goodbye.’
For a while after he put the telephone back on its rest no sound came through the speaker other than the slight rustle of paper. Then he spoke.
‘Since we’ve had an interruption I think this is a suitable moment to break the examination off for five minutes.’ He slapped the file shut. ‘Babuji – tell the guard to hold the prisoner outside.’
The clerk got up and went to the door through which Kumar had entered, opened it and spoke to the guard. Kumar glanced round. His movements suggested that he had not clearly understood what Rowan said.
‘We shall call you back,’ Rowan told him. Kumar stood up.
‘In about five minutes we shall continue the examination.’
It was extraordinary, she thought. When he stood he gave the appearance of a shambling man – one who might not be expected to think clearly or speak precisely. He ducked his head, then turned. The guard had appeared and now accompanied him out. The clerk also went out – closing the door behind him, leaving Rowan and Gopal alone.
Rowan said, ‘Let’s use these few minutes to consider really what our terms of reference are. If I may say so these questions about his interrogation by District Superintendent Merrick in regard to the criminal assault tend to lead away from the main point about his association with a group of fellows who were clearly politically committed and politically involved—’
‘I’m sorry to disagree with you, Captain Rowan. Perhaps I have had less time than you to study the files of this curious case, and it is most unusual for a detenu to be examined, in fact I have never come across it before, neither has my superior. I have assumed that since His Excellency personally ordered the examination some serious doubt has arisen about the order for detention. From my reading of the files – coupled with my recollections of the actual circumstances – I feel that the order rested entirely on the original suspicion this young man was under in regard to the criminal assault. For that reason I feel that the criminal assault aspect should now become the focus for our questions. It would have been useful if you had agreed to a previous consultation, but my clerk told me you were unable to find the time.’
