Present: Wood Renton J.    June.13,1911

THE KING v. AMADORU et al.

78 and 79-D. C. (Crim.), Tangalla, 721,

Criminal Procedure Code, s. 440-Evidence found to be false on the balance of conflicting evidence-False evidence disclosing serious criminal charge-Summary punishment.

Semble, there is nothing in section 440 of the Criminal Procedure Code which prevents a Court from adopting the summary method provided by that section for punishing a witness for giving false evidence, even in cases where the false evidence charged disclosed a serious criminal offence, or where the Judge arrived at his conclusion that perjury had been committed on the balance of conflicting evidence.

All that section 440 requires is that the accused persons should have given evidence in a judicial proceeding, which, in the opinion of the Court before which that proceeding is held, is false.

THE facts appear from the judgment.

Samarawickreme, for the accused, appellants.

Walter Pereira, K.C., S.-G., for the Crown.

June 13, 19.11. Wood Renton J.-

In this case there are two appellants, of whom the first was the complainant and the second a witness, in