Thomson CJ:

[1] These appellants were convicted at Muar for the murder of a man Subramaniam and a woman Chan Chong Moy on Temiang Renchong Estate, Pagoh, on or about 21 September 1958. They appealed against their convictions and on 23 September 1959, we allowed their appeals and set their convictions aside.

[2] The dead bodies of Subramaniam and Chan Chong Moy were found at some distance from each other on the estate in question in circumstances which clearly showed they had been killed. The man had a single stab wound in the stomach and the woman had two stab wounds in the chest. Apart from a slight superficial abrasion on the man's neck there were no other external injuries on the bodies.

[3] Except on one point, to which I shall return later, the only evidence as to how the deceased came by their fatal injuries was that of one Ramaya, an Indian boy who said (and this was never questioned) that he was twelve years old. Briefly his evidence, which was given on affirmation, was as follows.

[4] On the afternoon of 20th September he was on his way to the garden of the first appellant to buy vegetables when he came on the third appellant sitting on the ground. Near him the two deceased were tied to trees. They were still alive but they could not talk as they were gagged. He went on his way and later the third appellant came to him at the first appellant's house and told him that if he said anything about what he had seen his life would be in danger.

[5] The following evening the first appellant came to him and told him that there was some work to be done and that he should wait on the Estate football field. He went to the football field where he found the sixth appellant and one Vitalingam. Shortly afterwards a car, number M 5324, came to the football field driven by the fifth appellant The first, second, third and fourth appellants were in it. The witness got into the car with the sixth appellant and Vitalingam and the whole party went to the first appellant's house where they had a meal, in the course of which the fourth and fifth appellants went away for a time, apparently in the motor-car. When they returned the fourth appellant told the witness that they were going to kill Subramaniam and Chan Chong Moy and asked him to be a sentry. He refused; whereupon the fourth appellant put a knife to his throat and said that if he did not act as a sentry he would be killed. On this he agreed.

[6] The whole party then went to the spot where the witness had seen Subramaniam and Chan Chong Moy tied to trees and found they were still there but had now been tied to neighbouring clumps of bamboos. They were untied and the six appellants took them into some thick bushes. It was then dark but the third appellant had a lamp. Some time later the six appellants returned carrying Chan Chong Moy who was now dead and Subramaniam who was still alive but had been stabbed in the stomach. The bodies were taken away in different directions and the witness did not see to where they were taken.

[7] If this story was true it clearly follows that whoever did the actual stabbing the six appellants combined and acted together to kill the two deceased.

[8] But was it true?

[9] Unfortunately, there was no evidence whatsoever to corroborate Ramaya's story so as to implicate any of the appellants except the fifth appellant who very much later on the night of 21st September was found apparently asleep in the car number M 5324, which was his property and which he used as a taxi, near the spot where the body of the male deceased was found. The appellants all denied any knowledge of the affair and attempted to set up alibis although none of them gave evidence on oath and the man Vitalingam, who was called as a witness for the prosecution, also denied any knowledge of the affair.

[10] Ramaya was arrested by the Police on 26th September and charged with the murder together with the appellants. Some time later he made statements to the Police and he was released and the mu