[Court OF Criminal APPEAL.]
 
1948 Present : Howard C.J. (President), Jayetileke J.
and Nagalingam J.
 
THE KING v. NAMASIVAYAM et al. Appeals Nos. 21-24 of 1948.
 
S.C. 21-24- M. C. Kurunagala, 19,878.

Court of Criminal Appeal-Depositions of witnesses in Magistrate's Court-Questions by trial Judge-Resulting affirmation that statement before Magistrate was true-Substantive evidence-Refreshing memory of witness-Misdirection - Prejudice to accused-Verdict based on illegal and inadmissible evidence- Evidence Ordinance, Section 159-Extension of time for appeal.
 
The accused were charged with being members of an unlawful assembly' tooting, criminal trespass and causing hurt. The defence did not contest the fact of perpetration of the offence but did contest that the prisoners on trial were responsible for it and the question of identification became, in consequence, of extreme importance. Some of the witnesses in the course of examination stated that they could not remember the presence of various accused, whereupon the trial judge proceeded to examine them in the following strain :
 
Q. You told the Magistrate that four people came an