R. v. Kassam Misc. Crim. Cause 20-D-70; 26/10/70; Georges C.J.

R. v. Kassam Misc. Crim. Cause 20-D-70; 26/10/70; Georges C.J.

This is an application by the Republic for leave to file an appeal out of time. At the trial the magistrate upheld a submission of no case to answer on the 13th April and released the accused but reserved his reasons which he gave later in an undated ruling. Under s. 335 Criminal Procedure Code, the Director of Public Prosecutions must give indication of his intention to appeal tot eh subordinate courts within 30 days of the acquittal finding or order. The issue was what would be the date of the order in this case and whether good cause had been shown for grant of leave to appeal out of time.

            Held: (1) Where a submission of no case to answer is made, “the ruling in effect becomes the judgment in the matter and must conform with section 171 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It should be in writing, contain the points of decision and the reasons for the decision on each point.” (2) “I would think that the appropriate date is the date of the acquittal. There would be nothing to prevent notice of intention to appeal from being given then or within 30 days of that date. No obligation would arise to ledge a petition because the period requisite for obtaining a copy of the ruling would be excluded from the computation of the 45 days.” (3) “The affidavit supporting the application for leave to appeal out of time is some respects unsatisfactory. Like the reasons for the ruling, it is undated – though the month has been typed in as June”. The notation shows that it was not filed until 29^th August, 1970.

            It does not set out any reasons why the notice of intention to appeal was not give promptly. Had this been done, then when the Director of Public Prosecution received the copy of the ruling on 18^th June, he could in complete compliance with the Code, have filed his petition within 45 days.

            “Section 335 provides that the High Court may for “good cause” admit an appeal notwithstanding that the periods of limitation prescribed in the section have elapsed.  (4) “There fact is that the affidavit filed by he applicant states no cause at all it merely sets out very briefly the history of the matter and states that the Republic intends to challenge the ruling by applying for leave to appeal. In his argument, Mr. Laxman pointed out that the ruling was received two months late. This could explain the failure to lodge a petition but not to give notice. The result is that now some six months later leave is being sought to reverse an acquittal.” (5) No good cause has been shown – Application refused.