SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1948 MarsdenLR 194

MURRAY AYNSLEY
REX – Appellant
Versus
TAN TEE – Respondent


Advocates:
For the applicant - Po Guan Hock

JUDGMENT

Murray-Aynsley CJ:

L Rayner: for the Crown in opposing the application said that in English practice, the Court of Criminal Appeal never allowed bail unless in very special circumstances and referred to the case of R v. Greenberg 17 Cr App R 106.

The Application was heard before Murray-Aynsley CJ, in Chambers who in giving oral judgment said that this was not an appeal to Court of Criminal Appeal but it was an appeal from the Police Court and that it has always been the practice in this country for Magistrates to allow bail to a convicted person unless the Magistrate has reasons for not allowing it. The usual reason for not allowing bail is the expectation that the appellant will abscond. Accordingly His Lordship allowed bail at $2,000 in two sureties of $1,000 each.

Application Allowed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top