1943 Present: Soertsz and Hearne JJ.

THE KING v. SUNDERAM et al.

79-80 D. C. (Crim.) Jaffna, 4,230

Joinder of charges-Conspiracy to commit three offences of cheating and forgery- Charge of three conspiracies committed in one transaction-No illegality- Failure to frame separate charges for each offence-Curable irregularity- Criminal Procedure Code, ss. 178, 179, 180 (1).

Section 178 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which lays down that there shall be a separate charge for ach distinct offence, includes offences committed on different occasions even though they fall under the same section, but non-compliance with the section in regard to the frame of the charge is a curable irregularity.

Where the offences of cheating, consisting of three acts committed within the space of twelve months, and forgery are committed in the course of one transaction, they may be tried together and included in the same indictment.

Where accused persons are charged with three conspiracies committed not within the space of twelve months but in the course of the same transaction and with the offences committed in pursuance of those conspiracies,-

Held, that there was no misjoinder of charges.

It should have been made clear that one conspiracy was charged to commit offences by means of acts, which themselves amounted to offences.

APPEAL from a conviction by the District Judge of Jaffna.

H. V. Perera, K.C. (with him H. W. Thambiah and V. Arulambalam), for accused, appellants.

H. W. R. Weerasooriya, C.C., for Crown, respondent.

Cur. adv. vult.

February 19, 1943. HEARNE J.-

The appellants, the first and second accused, and the third accused, who was acquitted, were tried in the District Court of Jaffna on an indictment which consisted of three charges-

(1) That between May, 1936, and September, 1937, at Karanavai and other places in the district of Jaffna, you did act together with a common purpose for committing one or more of the following offences to wit, (a) cheating the Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada, Colombo, by inducing the said Company to deliver to you certain policies of life assurance in favour of one T. Chellappah (since deceased), personated by the third accused, (b) cheating the said Company by dishonestly inducing the said Company to deliver to you a sum of Rs. 9,000, falsely alleged to have been due on the said policies, (c) forgery of applications for the issue of the said policies of assurance on the life of the said T. Chellappah, personated by the third accused, and thereby committed the offence of conspiracy in consequence of which were committed the offences of cheating, attempting to cheat and forgery or any of them punishable under sections 113, 102, 403, and 457 of the Penal Code.

(2) That at the times and places aforesaid and in the course of the transaction set out in count (1), you did deceive the Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada by falsely representing to the said Company that the applicant for assurance in certain policies of Life Assurance was one T. Chellappah (since deceased) and that third accused was the said T. Chellappah, whereas in fact the applicant was not the said T. Chellappah nor was third accused the said T. Chellappah, and thereby dishonestly induced the said Company to accept the applications for assurance and to issue the said policies, to wit, Nos. 3240071 of July 24, 1936, 3243162 of September 12, 1936, and 3250422 of May 20, 1937, in favour of T. Chellappah, in an aggregate sum of Rs. 9,000, which acts the said Company would not but for the said deceit have done and which acts were likely to cause damage to the said Company in the sum of Rs. 9,000 or part thereof, and that you have thereby committed an offence punishable under section 403 of the Penal Code.

(3) That at the times and places aforesaid, and in the course of the same transaction as aforesaid, you did with intent to commit fraud make a false document