Police evidence in an assault case involving three Indians was given in HIM, Police Court on Monday morn-Ing. At the previous hearing, when Mr.
Maitland, counsel for the com-Piainant, said he had concluded his case, the Registrar, Mr. C. H. Haines, adjourned the proceedings in order to hear the evidence of the police. The complainant, Muntaz Ah, said that policemen. "had witnessed an assault on him by Nawab Khan and Azad Khan. The former of the two accused is alleged to have struck Muntaz Ah behind the ear with an iron bar and the latter to have assaulted him with a stick. Both men, Who are represented by Mr. Paul Premet, have pleaded not guilty.
CPC. 2094 said he sow Nawab Khan hit the complainant with an fron bar, which witness later took away. He did not sce Azad Khan.
Japanese P.C. 194 said he saw Azad Khan raise a long leather-cov-Jered stick to strike the complainant, but witness took away the slick before a blow was struck. He saw Nawab Khan, but he did not remember whether that man had taken part fin the fight or not.
An Indian witness, called on behalf!
the defence, stated that Azad Khan was attacked by three ollier [Indians and Nawab Khan intervened to help Azad. Witness did. not. see Jeither "Azad Khan or Nawab Khan carrying weapons.
Cross-examined by Mr. Maitland, witness denied that, between 6 pin, and 7 pin. on August 28, the time the fight took place, he was sitting on the grass plot by the Bund, talking to two other Indians, Mr. Maitland then asked for an ad Jjournment to enable him to call wi linosses to discredit the evidence given for the defence,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.