Back
KING v. HENDRIC SINHO
NLR7V97
KING v. HENDRIC SINHO.
Murder-Acquittal of prisoner on charge of murder-Prosecution for abetment of murder-Plea of autre fois acquit-Criminal Procedure Code, s. 181 and s. 330, sub-section (1).
Where A, having been acquitted of a charge of murder, was indicted for abetment of murder,-
Held that, in a case coming within section 181 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a charge of murder and a charge of abetment of murder against the same person may be joined, and that even without a separate charge of abetment, the accused may be convicted of abetment of murder on the charge of murder.
Held also, that as at the previous trial the accused was acquitted of murder, and the jury did not pronounce him guilty of abetment of murder, the plea of autre fois acquit raised by the accused must prevail.
AT its second Criminal Session of 1903 for the Western Circuit the Supreme Court tried one Suwa, Hendric Sinho, and Abraham for the murder of Gunaratne Terunnanse. The jury found Suwa guilty of murder, and brought in a verdict of acquittal as regards Hendric Sinho and Abraham.
In the following session of the Supreme Court Hendric Sinho and Abraham, being indicted for abetting Suwa in the murder of Gunaratne Terunnanse, pleaded autre fois acquit.
Dornhorst, K.C., for the accused.
Ramanathan, S.-G., for the Crown.
The arguments of counsel appear in the following judgment of the learned Commissioner of Assize (Mr. T. E. Sampayo, K.C.).
Cur. adv. vult.
24th August, 1903. Mr. Commissioner SAMPAYO-
The charge made against the two accused in this case is that on or about the 17th November, 1902, at Hunupola in Avissawella, one Dambadeniya-achige Suwaris alias Suwa committed murder by causing the death of one Talwalgoda Gunaratne Terunnanse, and that the accused aided and abetted the said Dambadeniya-achige Suwaris alias Suwa in the commission of the said offence of murder, which was committed in consequence of the said abetment, and that they thereby committed an offence punishable under sections 102 and 296 of the Ceylon Penal Code.
To this charge the accused pleaded a previous acquittal in case No. 16 of the second Criminal Session of 1903 for the Western Circuit, wherein, it has been proved, the said Suwaris alias Suwa
and the present first and second accused were charged with and duly tried for the murder of the said Gunaratne Terunnanse, with the result that Suwaris alias Suwa was convicted of murder and the present accused were acquitted altogether.
Section 330, sub-section (1), of " The Criminal Procedure Code, 1898,'' provides that a person who has once been tried by a court of competent jurisdiction for an offence and convicted or acquitted of such offence shall not be liable to be tried again on the same facts for any other offence for which a different charge might have been made under section 181. or for which he might have been convicted under section 182. Section 181 provides that, if a single act or series of acts is of such a nature that it is doubtful which of several offences the facts which can be proved will constitute, the accused may be charged with all or any one or more of such offences, and any number of such charges may be included in one and the same indictment; and section 182 provides that, if in the case mentioned in the preceding section, the accused is charged with one offence and it appears in evidence that he committed a different offence, for which he might have been charged under the provisions of section 181, he may be convicted of the offence which he is shown to have committed, although he was not charged with it.
At the argument of the questions raised by the plea the learned Solicitor-General informed me that he relied on the same facts as were put before the jury at the previous trial, but that in the present case he would develop them, that is to say, as he explained hi
