Attorney General V. Geetin Singho

1956 Present : K. D. de Silva, J., and Sansoni, J.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL, Petitioner, and K. GEETIN SINGHO,
Respondent

S. C. 496-Application in revision in M. C. Nuwara Eliya,
11,588

Information Book-Statement of a complainant recorded therein-Right of accused to obtain certified copy of it-" Public document "-" Right of inspection "- Evidence Ordinance, ss. 74, 76, 123, 124, 125-Criminal Procedure Code, ss. 121(1), 122-Proof of Public Documents Ordinance, ss. 2, 3.

An accused person is entitled to obtain a certified copy of a first complaint recorded by the Police under the provisions of section 121 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The entry in the Information Book relating to the first complaint is a public document, which the accused has a right to inspect; subject, therefore, to any claim of privilege under sections 123, 124 and 125 of the Evidence Ordinance, the accused is entitled to obtain a certified copy of such entry under sections 74 and 76 of the Evidence Ordinance.

Quaere, (i) whether the accused is entitled to the same right under sections 2 and 3 of the Proof of Public Documents Ordinance.

(ii) whether a Magistrate has jurisdiction to order the Police to issue a certified copy.

APPLICATION to revise an order of the Magistrate's Court, Nuwara Eliya.

Douglas Jansze, Acting Solicitor-General, with L. B. T. Premaratne, Crown Counsel, for the petitioner.

H. W. Jayewardene, Q.C., with A. C. M. Uvais, for the accused respondent.

Cur. adv. vult.

February 15, 1956. DE SILVA, J.-

This is an application by the Attorney-General to revise an order made on September 16,1955, by the Magistrate, Nuwara Eliya, on a motion filed on behalf of the respondent to obtain a certified copy of the 1st complaint or 1st information made to the Police in this case. A. A. Saraph, police sergeant, officer-in-charge, Punduluoya Police Station, who is the complainant made a report to Court in terms of Section 148

(1) (b) on July 20, 1955, that the respondent did on July 17, 1955, cause hurt to one Sirisena with a sharp cutting instrument, an offence punishable under Section 315 of the Penal Code. On the same day the respondent on being charged with the offence pleaded not guilty and the case was fixed for trial on 18.8.'55, and later trial was refixed for 15.9.'55. On 3.9.'55 the respondent's proctor made a written application to the Assistant Superintendent of Police, Nuwara Eliya, for a certified copy of the 1st complaint. On the same day he also filed a motion in Court requesting that the Assistant Superintendent of Police be ordered to issue a certified copy of the 1st complaint. On this motion the learned Magistrate noticed the Assistant Superintendent of Police, " to show any reason why the application should not be granted ". The matter came up for consideration on 15.9.'55 when Mr. N. D. T. Kanakaratne Crown Counsel who appeared for the Assistant Superintendent of Police opposed the application. The arguments urged by the learned Crown Counsel and the proctor who appeared for the respondent have not been recorded in detail. The respondent's proctor took up the position that the Information Book was a public document within the meaning of Section 74 of the Evidence Ordinance. The learned Crown Counsel conceded this but appears to have taken up the position that the Information Book was not a document which the respondent had a right to inspect and that therefore he was not entitled to obtain a certified copy of an entry in it. The learned Magistrate in his order has referred to this argument. He has stated that the prosecution argued that the defence had no right to inspect the Information Book except under the conditions mentioned in Section 122 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Magistrate while conceding that the defence was not entitled to obtain certified copies of statements recorded under Section 122 (1) of the Criminal Pro

Click Here to Read the rest of this document