JUDGMENT
Gordon-Smith CJ, A-G:
In this appeal No. 1 accused appealed as regards his sentence only and No. 2 accused appealed against his conviction. The charge was unlawful possession of ammunition, 48,952 rounds in ammunition boxes.
The appeal of No. 1 was dismissed and that of No. 2 accused was successful to the extent that the conviction was quashed and retrial was ordered. We stated that we would give our reasons later.
Accused No. 1 pleaded guilty and the learned Judge postponed sentence until after the hearing of the case against No. 2 accused. He should have been removed not only from the dock but from the Court also. He was, later, called by No. 2 accused as a witness and had been in Court the whole time. This of course was not actually very material but it was undesirable.
At the conclusion of the prosecution case against No. 2 accused (he was unrepresented) he elected to make a statement from the dock. He was twice interrupted by the Judge and told, in effect, that he must not give hearsay evidence. We think that an accused making a statement from the dock should be allowed to do so in his own way whether or not part of what he says is, technically inadmissible or not.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.