( 184 )
DEW v.' ANGAMDTTU:P. C., Hatton, 21,021.
Arrest by private person—Pursuit of offender—Lawful custody—CriminalProcedure Code, s. 36.
A private person, in whose view theft is being committed in hisestate, may, so long as he keeps the offender in sight, pursue himinto a neighbouring estate and catch him there so as to make hisapprehension lawful custody.
'J^'HE facts of the case sufficiently appear in the judgment.
Wendt, for appellant.
18th August, 1896. Withers, J.—
The defendant was charged with the offence of escaping fromlawful custody, and has been sentenced to one month’s rigorousimprisonment.
No leave was given to appeal, but Mr. Wendt put forward onbehalf of the accused a point of law, and the point of law wasthat the man was not in thd lawful custody of Mr. Dew when heshook himself from Mr. Dew’s grasp and ran away. It appearsthat Mr. Dew had seen this man stealing grass from his estate,and having seen him he ran after him to catch him and take himinto custody. The man ran across to the neighbouring estate, inwhich he appears to have been employed, and the complainantovertook him and apprehended him. Before he could take himbefore the Magistrate to charge with the offence the manstruggled hard to get away and got away.
It was contended that while Mr. Dew might, have arrested himwithout a warrant for committing in his presence a cognizableoffence, he had no authority to pursue him and arrest him outsidehis own property.
Counsel relied on section 36 of the Criminal Procedure, Code,which, it was argued, limited a private person’s right to arrest onor at the- spot where the offence is being committed.
However, in the absence of any authority I am prepared tohold that so long as Mr. Dew kept the thief in sight, he was atliberty to pursue him into the next estate and catch him, so as tomake his apprehension lawful custody, so I think the point oflaw is not a sufficiently good one.
DEW v. ANGAMUTTU