Hill AGCJ:

We dismissed this appeal on 11 July 1960, and indicated that we would state our reasoning for doing so at a later date.

The appellant was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder on 25 August 1959, of Ku Bedah binti Ku Hassan at Kampong Kodiang Lama in the State of Kedah. The dead woman was the appellant's ex-wife.

Except for certain evidence with regard to motive the case for the prosecution consisted entirely of circumstantial evidence and the gravamen of the appeal is that the verdict of the jury was perverse in that no reasonable jury if properly directed would have found the appellant guilty.

At the conclusion of the case for the prosecution appellant's Counsel submitted that no prima facie case had been made out against the appellant which if unrebutted would warrant his conviction. At this stage of the trial the record shows that defence Counsel addressed the jury "under s. 214(iii) of the Criminal Procedure Code" (sic), that the Deputy Public Prosecutor replied and that the learned trial Judge gave a direction to the jury which was in the nature of a summing-up.

Section 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code is as follows:

214.(i)When the case fo