R. v. Otto s/o Miller, Crim. Rev. 50-D-68, 17/7/68, Biron J.

R. v. Otto s/o Miller, Crim. Rev. 50-D-68, 17/7/68, Biron J.

Accused was charged with driving a motor vehicle on the public road without due care and attention, thereby causing his vehicle to run off the road. The magistrate found that there was no case to answer and acquitted him. The magistrate then heard more witnesses, purporting to act under section 175 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which allows the court to order the complainant to pay the accused a reasonable sum for trouble and expenses to which accused has been put by reason of a frivolous and vexatious charge. It was the magistrate’s view that the accused had been forced off the road by a prosecution witness, a rival bus company’s driver. The magistrate thereupon ordered the witness’ employer to pay compensation to the accused for his loss of profits and cost of spares.

            Held: (1)Section 175 allows an order only against the complainant – here, the police – and not against a witness, or his employer. (2) The order is to be for compensation for trouble and expense arising from the charge, and not from those acts – here, the accident – which result in a charge being brought. The magistrate had no jurisdiction to make the order made here; it is ultra vires, and is therefore set aside.