JUDGMENT

This is an appeal by the Public Prosecutor. against the decision of the learned magistrate given on 26 May 1997 whereby the respondent who was changed for an offence under section 56(1)(d) of the Immigration Act 1959/63 was acquitted and discharged.

At the commencement of the hearing of the appeal the learned counsel for the respondent raised a preliminary objection. It was submitted that the respondent was not served with the notice of appeal, the petition of appeal and the notes of proceedings. It was further submitted that the appellant should serve the notice of appeal, petition of appeal containing the grounds of appeal and the notes of evidence on the respondent or his counsel before the appeal can be set down for hearing. In this case it is definitely against natural justice that the respondent was not given the legal right to know the [2] grounds of appeal. The respondent was not given the opportunity to prepare his case and is deprived of his legal right to contest the appeal. So it was submitted that the appeal should be dismissed.

The learned Deputy Public Prosecutor ("the DPP") submitted that they have complied with section 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code ("the CPC"). The respondent was acquitted on 22 April 1997 and they faxed the notice of appeal to the Subordinate Court on 25 April 1997 which receipt was acknowledged by the Subordinate Court. The Registrar of the Subordinate Court has served the notes of proceedings on them on 2 June 1997 and they filed the petition of appeal on 9 June 1997. Nowhere in section 307 of the CPC makes it mandatory for the appellant to serve the respondent with the notice of appeal, the notes of proceedings and the petition of appeal.

In reply the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the fact that the appellant has complied with the CPC is insufficient for this appeal to proceed as the respondent is unable to prepare his case and contest the appeal without those documents.

Section 307(i) of the CPC reads as follows:

"307. (i) Except in any case to which section 304 applies and subject to the provisions of sections 305 and 306 any person who is dissatisfied with any judgment, sentence or order pronounced by any Magistrate's Court in a criminal case or matter to which he is a party may prefer an appeal to the High Court against [3] such judgment, sentence or order in respect of any error in law or in fact or on the ground of the alleged excessive severity or of the alleged inadequacy of any sentence by lodging, within ten days from the time of such judgment, sentence or order being passed or made, with the clerk of such Magistrate's Court a notice of appeal in triplicate addressed to the High Court and by paying at the same time the prescribed appeal fee."

The order of acquittal and discharge of the respondent was made by the learned magistrate on 22 April 1997. The notice of appeal dated 24 April 1997 was faxed to the Registrar, Subordinate Court, Sibu on 25 April 1997. The appellant has therefore complied with section 307(i) of the CPC. There is no requirement under section 307(i) of the CPC for the appellant to serve a copy of the notice of appeal on the respondent or his advocate.

Section 307(iv) of the CPC reads as follows:-

"(iv) Within ten days after the copy of the grounds of decision has been served as in the last preceding subsection provided, the appellant shall lodge with the clerk of the Magistrate's Court at which the trial was held a petition of appeal in triplicate addressed to the High Court."

On 28 May 1997 the Registrar of the Subordinate Court, Sibu sent the notes of proceedings and the grounds of judgment to the DPP which was served on 2 June 1997. And on 9 June 1997 the appellant filed the petition of appeal with the Registrar of the Subordinate Court, Sibu.

Here again the appellant has complied with section 307(iv) of the CPC. Under section 307(iv) of the CPC the [4] appellant is not required to serve a copy of the petition of appeal to the responde