1. I think these oases have been very properly brought before the Court, so that the two pleaders, Mr. K.M. and Mr. U.G. may have the opportunity of explaining to the Court the circumstances relating to their imprisonment on the charges that were made against them, and I think they have now stated very fully, and I am prepared to say very fairly, the facts of their respective oases. They both disclaim and disavow any intention at all of either disobeying the District Magistrate's orders, or of in any way paralysing the administration of justice. They express regret that; in the one case the sending out of a telegram to the press; and in the other case the refusal to sign a statement before the Magistrate have been understood to show a spirit of disaffection or an intention either to disobey the orders of the duly constituted authorities or in any way to paralyse the administration of justice. I think that we can accept their statements as being accurate and accept their expressions of regret as being genuine and, under the circumstances I think that we can quite properly order the sanad to be issued to these two pleaders.
2. In both oases our attention was also called to a minor offence of having engaged themselves in another profession while they were still pleaders. It appears that they had not renewed their sanads when they took up their respective occupations on the press. Is appears also that the work was done mainly without any sort of remuneration--a matter which can without difficulty be overlooked.
3. In these circumstances, the sanads will be issued.
Coutta Trotter, J.
4. I am of the same opinion. Ali the concern that I have had in this or in any of these cases is to make it as plain as any language of mine can make it that, while this Court will not interfere with or have regard to any man's political opinions or opinions on public Questions, it is impossible to allow a parson, who proclaims or practices what is called the doctrine of 'Civil disobedience', to ask to be part of the machinery of the courts which exist for the very purpose of the thwarting of civil disobedience and the enforcement of civil obedience. He may be a perfectly honourable man; he may act from conscientious motives; he may in conceivable circumstances be a patriot. It may be imagined that he should not be punished or even prosecuted for holding or expressing these opinions. All our business is to say that however admirable a person he may be, he cannot consistently with his professions, ask to be considered and to be adopted as part of the machinery of this Court for enforcement of law and order. But I am satisfied now, I confess I was not before from their last statements, that the intention of these gentlemen is to give an assurance to this Court, which I hole the Court is entitled to demand, that they are not and do not in the future intend to be, exponents of the doctrine of civil disobedience.
5. For these reasons, I agree with my Lord that sanads may be properly issued to them.
6. I also agree with the opinion of the learned Chief Justice and that of my learned brother Coutts Trotter that in these two oases we should not withhold the sanad. I do not think it necessary, after what fell from the Chief Justice with which I entirely agree, that I need say anything more.
7. I agree to the order proposed.
8. I should like to add that I agree entirely with what has just fallen from my learned brother Coutts Trotter.