|
Appeal. from
conviction by the High
Fresh
evidence--formal application not
filed but application heard
on merits.
Held: (I) That
the neglect to make. the
application is not a mere
formality Court. and nature of
further evidence was not fully
disclosed.
(2) To grant it
might leave the door open to an
accused to demand that Court
of Appeal
instead of trial Court should try
him. Application refused.
C. N. S.
Pollurd for Crown.
Sir W. Geary
(with him A. Soeta.n)
for 3rd Appellant.
A. Soetan
(alone) for 1st, 2nd, 5th and
6th Appellants.
J. E. C.
David for 4th Appellant.
The following
order was given :-
KINGDON, C.l,
NIGEHIA.
Although formal
application, in the prescribed
form, to call fresh evidence has
not been filed, the Court as an
act of indulgence has allow\ed
that application to be made on
behalf of the appellant, and has
considered it on its merits. The
neglect, however, to make the
application in proper form is not
a mere formality, for up to the
present moment the appellant has
not fully disclosed the nature of
the evidence he wishes to give.
It would form a
most dangerous precedent to grant
this application; it would leave
the door open to any accused who
wished to be obstructive to stand
mute at his trial and then to
demand that the Court of Appeal,
instead of the trial Court should
try him.
If there were
irregularities at the trial, that
is a different matter. It is
raised in the grounds of appeal
and will be considered in due
course.
The application to call fresh
evidence is refused |
