[Full Bench.]

Present: Lascelles C.J. and Wood Renton and Pereira JJ.

THE KING v. PILA et al.

12-P. C. Avissawella, 12.087.

Evidence of bad character, of accused who were charged with murder-Not objected to at trial-Point certified by Attorney-General under s. 355 (3), Criminal Procedure Code-Right of the Attorney-General to certify-Admissibility of evidence.

The accused in this case were charged with murder. A principal witness for the prosecution explained his delay in reporting what he had seen by his fear of the accused, who, he said, were " reputed rowdies." In order to corroborate him, evidence was called to prove that the accused were by repute men of bad character, and were generally feared by the villagers. This evidence was not objected to in any way by counsel for the accused, and no application was made by him to the presiding Judge to state a case in terms of section 355 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Held, that the evidence called to prove that the accused were by repute men of bad character and were generally feared by the villagers was inadmissible.

The Attorney-General may certify under section 355 (3) any Question of law arising on a criminal trial before the Supreme Court, though the. question has not been actually raised and debated at the trial.

Per LASCELLES C.J. and Wood Renton J.-The Attorney-General, in certifying a case for consideration by this Court, acts in a quasi-judicial capacity, and the proper and convenient course is for him, after signing the certificate, to leave the case for the prisoner in the hands of his counsel, and to arrange that the Crown is adequately represented.

Per Pereira J.-A counsel who deliberately and studiedly omits to object to the reception of inadmissible evidence does so at the risk of his client.

THIS case came up for review on a certificate given by the Acting Attorney-General (the Hon. Mr. J. van Langenberg, K.C.) in the following terms: -

In the Supreme Court of the Island of Ceylon.

Case No. 12 (Police Court, Avisawella, 12.087), tried before the Hon. Mr. Justice Wood Renton at the Sessions now being held at Kandy.,

The King vs. Egodage Pila et al.

To the Honourable the Chief Justice and the other Justices of the said Court.

I, James van, Langenberg, Acting Attorney-General, certify that I am of opinion that the question of law hereinafter stated arising on the trial of the above case ought to be further considered, and submit the same to this Honourable Court for final determination under section 855 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

In this case the accused above named were charged with the murder of one Ungi, a Sinhalese woman about seventy years of age. The accused were found guilty and sentenced to death.

The facts of the case are shortly as follows. The deceased Ungi left her village on some day in the month of June last to visit her daughter Sooti at a village called Uda Kanugalla. She never reached her destination. Her remains were found on July 7 in a jungle skirting the road she had to take. The inference from the medical evidence is that death was due to violence. A witness, Adonissa, gave evidence to the effect that he saw the accused dragging the deceased into the jungle near about where her body was subsequently found. As he went forward to help her, the second and third accused threatened him with knives. When first questioned by the Korala, he said he knew nothing. Subsequently, on July 13, he made a statement to the Magistrate implicating the accused. The reason he gave for not disclosing these facts earlier was that the accused were bad characters, and he was afraid of them. In order to corroborate him, evidence was called to prove that the accused were by repute men of bad character, and were generally feared by the villagers.

It is submitted for the decision of Your Lordships whether the evidence relating to the character of the accused was admissible, in view of the terms