अमर शहीद अशफ़ाक़उल्ला ख़ाँ: व्यक्तित्व और कृतित्व (काकोरी के अमर शहीद का जीवन व रचनाएँ)

( 103 )
free from religious prejudices.
112. While it is admitted that Ashfáqullah was at one time
[Alleged quarrel with Banarsi Lal.] on very friendly terms with Banarsi Lal, it
is alleged that the two quarrelled during the
non-co-operation days because Banarsi Lal
appropriated some European cloth which had been sent to the
Congress Office at Shahjahanpur by one Kunwar Indar Bikram
Singh to be burnt. The witnesses to prove this are Ayub Ahmad
Sabar, Editor of the Sitara (D. W. 13) who admits a conviction
10 under section 124A I. P. C. for writing a seditious poem, and
Muhammad Mujtaba Hasan Khan (D. W. 15) a "teacher of theology
and student of Urani medicine." There are several reasons for
distrusting this story. The first witness says that he was secretary
of the Congress office at the time; the second says that Banarsi Lal
was secretary and that he remained secretary afterwards. Second-
ly Kunwar Indar Bikram Singh himself made no complaint and
apparently knew nothing about the matter nor did it come before
the Congress committee. Thirdly—and this seems conclusive—the
incident is stated to have taken place in the hot weather of either
20 1922 or 1923, yet we find Ashfaqullah writing a friendly letter to
Banarsi Lal (Ex. P. 15) on the 11th December 1923; and the still
more friendly letter Ex. P. 14 was probably written after that
date. It may also be noted that in his statement in court Ashfaq-
ullah says nothing about quarrelling with Banarsi Lal. In the O. P. 162.
Magistrate's court he did not mention the story of the cloth at
all. In this court he only said that he had heard that Banarsi Lal
had misused some foreign cloth. Banarsi Lal was not cross-exam-
ined by Ashfaqullah's counsel on this point. In answer to Bakshi's
counsel he admitted that some clothes for burning were deposited
30 at his house but denied that his honesty in the matter had ever
been called in question.
113. The main argument advanced on behalf of Ashfaqullah
relates to his identification. It is asked why
[Arguments for Ashfaqullah. 1. Identification. (a) History of his photograph.] so many witnesses identified him; while so
few (comparatively) identified Bakshi and it
is contended that his photograph must have
been shown to them or he must have been
described to them beforehand. The complaint is also made on his
behalf that he was not given a fair chance, that he had no one to
40 represent or assist him at the proceedings and that the men parad-
ed with him were unsuitable for the purpose.
The answer given by the counsel for the Crown to the ques-
tion why so many witnesses identified him is that he is of some-
what striking and unusual appearance, being powerfully built and
good looking, and that if; as the prosecution witnesses suggest, he
played a leading part in each dacoity, it is natural that the atten-
tion of the witnesses should have been specially directed towards