Daniel Appuhamy V. The Queen

[IN THE PRIVY COUNCIL]

1962 Present: The Lord Chancellor, Lord Morton of Henryton,
Lord Evershed, Lord Guest, and Lord Pearee

G. R. DANIEL APPUHAMY, Appellant, and THE QUEEN,
Respondent

Privy Council Appeal No. 12 of 1961

S. C. 19-M. C. Kegalle, 22,585

Criminal Procedure Code-Section 440 (1)-Summary punishment of a witness for perjury in open court-Procedure that should be followed in a trial before Supreme Court--Duty of Court to inform witness of the gist of the accusation against him.

Under section 440 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code it is for the Court, and not for the jury, to decide whether false evidence has been given by a witness, and if in the Court's opinion .the witness has given false evidence, then the Supreme Court has power to sentence summarily " as for & contempt of the Court".

A rider brought by the jury to the effect that the witness should be dealt with for giving false evidence is not equivalent to a verdict of guilty to a charge of perjury.

It is not necessary when proceeding under section 440 (1) for the accusation of giving false evidence to be stated with the particularity required in a count of a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document