JUDGMENT

Sharma J:

(delivering oral judgment): I had called for the records in this case. The three accused were charged under s. 379 of the Penal Code for having committed theft of 800 cocoanuts said to be valued at $104. At the end of the prosecution case the learned magistrate ruled that there was a prima facie case for the accused to answer, but in the very next breath he said:

I am making this ruling not because I am satisfied with the case of the prosecution but because I want the accused to explain for themselves.

Having called upon the accused for their defence and having heard all of them, he observed:

Having heard all the evidence the Court is partially satisfied that the charge has been proved since the accused have not given any reasonable explanation as to the charge against them. However, in view of the facts which have been given by PW3 and PW4 whom the Court feels have an axe to grind, the Court is taking a lenient view of their offences.

With the greatest respect to the learned magistrate I have to observe that he failed to apply and totally ignored the very elementary principles which a Court of criminal justice must strictly adhere to. It is the duty of the p