[IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL]

1958 Present : Basnayake, C.I. (President), Sansoni, I., and
Sinnetamby, J.

THE QUEEN v. K. A. WIJEHAMY et al.

APPEALS 55 AND 57 OF 1958, WITH APPLICATIONS 72, 73, 74 AND 76

S.C.6--M.C. Colombo,37797

Evidence-Finger prints and palm prints-Mode of proof-Evidence Ordinance, s. 45.

When, in a criminal case, the prosecution relies on the report of a finger print expert to the effect that the finger prints said to have been found at the scene of the offence were those of an accused person, there must be direct evidence that the finger prints of the accused were handed to the finger print expert.

Evidence should not be elicited from a finger print expert as to the opinion he formed from a comparison of photographs of finger prints, when the photographs are not productions in the case. Under section 45 of the Evidence Ordinance it is for the Court to form an opinion as to the identity of finger and palm impressions, assisted by the opinion of an expert.

APPEALS, with applications for leave to appeal,' against certain convictions in a trial before the Supreme Court.

C. S. Barr Kumarakulasinghe, with T. W.