SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

Weerasooriya, J
ATTORNEY GENERAL – Appellant
Versus
DON DAVITH – Respondent


Advocates:
F. S. A. Pullenayegum, Crown Counsel, for Attorney-General, (Complainant-Appellant).
No appearance for Accused-Respondent.

Attorney General V. Don Davith

1960 Present : Weerasooriya, J.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL,

Appellant, and R. J. DON DAVITH,
Respondent

S. C. 645-M. C. Colombo, 17392/C

Criminal Procedure Code-Absence of witness on date of trial-Application for issue of warrant to compel attendance-Duty of Court to grant it- Sections 62 (I) (6), 148 (1) (b), 282.

When a prosecution witness is absent without reasonable excuse although served with summons, it is the duty of the Magistrate, unless for reasons to be recorded by him he deems it unnecessary to do so, to issue a warrant to compel the witness's attendance, if the prosecution makes application for such warrant.

APPEAL from an order of the Magistrate's Court, Colombo.

F. S. A. Pullenayegum, Crown Counsel, for Attorney-General, (Complainant-Appellant).

No appearance for Accused-Respondent.

March 22,1960. WEERASOORIYA, J.-

This is an appeal by the Attorney-General against an order acquitting and discharging the accused-respondent. The report to Court filed under Section 148 (1) (b) of the Criminal Procedure Code charged the accused with the offence of voluntarily causing hurt with a sword to one Michael Kelaart. On the







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top