040-NLR-NLR-V-46-POPALAI-Appellant-and-SULTAN-et-al.-Respondents.pdf
U8
KEUNEMAN J.—Popalai and Sultan.
1944 .Present: K©lineman J.
POPALAI, Appellant, and SULTAN et al., Bespondents.
331—-M. C. Trincomalee, 9,277.
Criminal Procedure Code, ss. 146 (1) (a) and 151—Refusal to issue process—Complainant’s witnesses not heard.
A Magistrate would be acting too abruptly if be refuses to issue processafter hearing the complainant alone and without hearing witnesses whoare available to support the complaint.
A
PPEALfrom an order of the Magistrate, Trincomalee.
Oh a complaint against the accused of house-trespass and theft the
Magistrate refused to issue process, without calling upon the complainantto produce his witnesses. The complainant appealed with the sanctionof the Attorney-General.
C. T. Olegasegarem, for the complainant, appellant.
No appearance for the accused, respondent.
June 27, 1944. Keuneman J.—
In this case the Magistrate after hearing the complainant alone refusedto issue process on the uncorroborated evidence of the complainant.It is not clear from the record that the complainant had no witnesses whocould support him, nor does the Magistrate appear to have enquired asto whether such witnesses were available at the spot or could be procuredat a later stage.
BOSE J.—Sheriff Dem and Thomae.
119
In the petition of appeal it is stated that there were six witnessesavailable to support the complaint. I think the Magistrate has perhapsacted too abruptly.
I set aside the order refusing process, and I send the case back to the.Magistrate to hear the complainant, if necessary; again, and any witnesseswhom the complainant may produce before the Magistrate. Afterhearing these witnesses the Magistrate will decide as to whether processshould issue or not.
Order set aside.