Lawrent v. R. Crim. App. 200-A-70; 17/10/70; Bramble, J.

Lawrent v. R. Crim. App. 200-A-70; 17/10/70; Bramble, J.

The appellant was charged with rape and convicted of Indecent Assault c/s. 135 of the Penal Code. The trial magistrate found that there was no proper corroboration to sustain a conviction of rape and stated that: “However, I would not acquit him just because the facts do not disclose rape. The accused is found guilty of the offence of indecent assault and is convicted on that offence.”

            Held: (1) “This was not a case of substituting one charge for another in which case the accused should be called upon to made a fresh plea. The intention was to apply section 181 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code which provides that: - “When a person is charged with an offence and facts are proved which reduce it to a minor offence although he was not charged with it.” (2) It is clear from the judgment that he learned magistrate did matter of practice in cases of indecent assault. Where there is no corroboration the magistrate must warn himself of the danger of conviction but if he finds that the evidence is so convincing that he feels that it would be safe to do so he may justifiably convict. Such a course has not been followed. Nowhere is it stated that he was so convinced with the evidence that he felt it safe to convict and on examining the record I would hesitate t say that the evidence was convincing.” (3) Appeal allowed.