Ong Hock Thye (Malaya) CJ:

These three appellants were among five persons charged with gang robbery under s. 395 of the Penal Code. Of the other two one was acquitted. He was the younger brother of the first appellant. His defence, an alibi, raised some doubt in the mind of the learned trial Judge who decided to give him the benefit of such doubt. The fifth accused was the one who had made a confession. He repeated it at the trial and was sentenced to two years' imprisonment the Judge taking into account his having made a clean breast of things. He has not appealed. Upon an amended charge of robbery, under s. 392 of the Penal Code, these appellants were convicted and each sentenced to seven years' imprisonment with six strokes of the rottan. They appeal against both conviction and sentence.

There are two common grounds of appeal against conviction: first, it was argued that the evidence of identification was unsatisfactory and secondly, that the confession of Ramasamy, the fifth accused, was not a confession and on that account should not have been taken into consideration against these appellants in the absence of other evidence clearly implicating them and each of them.