এই পাতাটির মুদ্রণ সংশোধন করা প্রয়োজন।
さbペ 够 शुन्न प्रेन ।' (आविन শব দাহ যখন বিশেষরূপ প্রমাণ হইয়া নাই। দায়রায়ও এ বিষয়ে প্রথমতঃ গিয়াছে, তখন এই আসামী কৃষ্ণলাল বিশেষ মনোযোগ দেওয়া হয় नfहे । প্রমাণ না হইলেও কিছু ক্ষতি স্বয়ং জজ সাহেব বলিয়াছিলেন, যে নাই । * - কালনার জমিয়" বস্ত অতি সামান্য t . -ব্যাপার । তথাপি কয়েকজন সাক্ষীয় কালনায় জমিয়তবস্ত হইয়াছিল cछायानयनौ न ७ ग्रां इहैण । माछिब्र - কি না ? अनाम ठानि श्राव्र लाग्नशी भश्दूिझ श्रांमब्र! भूकई बलिब्राहि, ७ नऋक ८थान नात्रौ । ॐiशाब्रां श्ररनक कथा কোন প্রমাণ মেজেষ্টিরীতে লণ্ডয়া হয় বলিলেন । কিন্তু কালনার চৌকিদারের
- “Combining all their testimonies I cannot avoid the conclusion that the prisoner's identity is sufficiently established by a preponderance of evidence above whatever has deen adduced to impeach it. Evidence in such a matter cannot be expected to amount to absolute demonstration. Some dimness, and it may be doubt, will obscure the recital now of details which occured at a remote date. But circumstauces considered, I look upon the proofs as being on the whole satisfactory. It is true that in the main point the Law-Officer rejects the evidence on the grounds that there are several descrepancies, which I admit, in the averments made by the witnesses who swears to the prisoner's identity with Kristo Lal. * * * For the reason's which I have stated above, it appears to mo, the identity is established by tolerably good, or I may say, sufficient evidence, although it may not be so satisfactory and decisive as the testimony to the Rajah's death. But I have a remark to make on this subject. After the prosecutor had proved the death and cremation of Rajah Prolab Chunder, it was, I think, in no way incumbent on him to show who the prisoner really is. So long as the death, cremation, and non-identity remain, as I regard them] firmly established, it would have been a matter of no moment to de case had le failed to prove that the prisoner is Kistolal].” Fttract from Νο 3 of the Calender for sent. igas. . . . . . . ****
