{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f219\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f220\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f222\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f223\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f224\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f225\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic){\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f226\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f227\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese){\*\falt Times New Roman};}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;
\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;
\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*
\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid734090\rsid1601487\rsid2448450\rsid3083917\rsid3279416\rsid3429240
\rsid3627743\rsid4404292\rsid5049419\rsid5403439\rsid5788832\rsid6038055\rsid7409435\rsid7555735\rsid8210733\rsid8532843\rsid8550526\rsid8913924\rsid9114076\rsid9446326\rsid11805133\rsid12087184\rsid12140626\rsid12197528\rsid12876572\rsid14364001
\rsid14832052\rsid15144565\rsid15628084}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\author blake_r}{\operator juston_m}{\creatim\yr2005\mo12\dy15\hr15\min27}{\revtim\yr2007\mo1\dy31\hr17\min6}{\version16}{\edmins120}{\nofpages1}{\nofwords4800}
{\nofchars27365}{\*\company USP}{\nofcharsws32101}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\subfontbysize\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701
\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3\jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot14364001 \fet0\sectd \linex0\sectdefaultcl\sftnbj {\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2
\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6
\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang 
{\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qr \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 [1991] 37 FLR 14}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917 HIGH COURT OF FIJI
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 KEPUELI JITOKO}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 v.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 THE STATE}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 [HIGH C}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 OURT, 1991 (Fatiaki J), 23 May]
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Appellate Jurisdiction
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 Crime- procedure- accused}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917 '}
{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 s right to adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defence- Judgment}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917  }{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 - duty of the Court to give rea}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917 sons - }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 21) Sections 120, 155, 188, 211.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 Evidence}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917  }{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 - criminal}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917  }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 - accused to be given opp}{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917 ortunity to present the defence - }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 evidence of juveniles}{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917  }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 - necessity for enquiry before admitting}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917 
 }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 - need for corroboration}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid3083917  }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 
- Juveniles Act (Cap 56) Section 10.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
On appeal against his convictions for rape the High Court, allowing the appeal HELD: (1) the Resident Magistrate had wrongly refused the Appellant's request for an adjournment (2) had deprived 
the Appellant of the right to be represented by Counsel (3) had failed to advise him of his entitlement to call witnesses (4) had wrongly admitted the evidence of juveniles and (5) had failed to deliver a Judgment complying with the requirements of the Co
de.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Cases cited:
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 Brij}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6038055 e}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917  Nand v R.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487  Lautoka Cr. App. No. 3 1984
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid1601487 C.A.Z.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  (1990) 91 Cr. App. R. 203
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 Chandar Pal v R.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  20 FLR 1
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 D.P.P. v Hester}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  (1972) 57 Cr. App. R. 212}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 D.P.P. v Kilbourne}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  (1973) 57 Cr. App. R. 381}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 Fazal Mohammed v The State}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  (1990) 91 Cr. App. R. 256}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 Joseph Carter}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12140626  (1960) 44 Cr. App. R.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  225
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 La}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12876572 l}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917  Khan}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  (1981) 73 Cr. App. R. 190}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 Mary Kingston}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  (1948) 23 Cr. App. R. 183}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 Paula Tukana v R.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  Suva Cr. App. No. 39 of 1977
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 Suresh Chand v R.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  Lautoka Criminal App. No. 77 of 1983
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Appeal against conviction entered in the Magistrates' Court.
\par Appellant in Person
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 S. Senaratne for the Respondent
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3083917 Fatiaki J:
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 The appellant was originally charged on the 6th September 1989 with an offence of }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 Rap}{
\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 e }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
allegedly committed on the 25th of May, 1989. He pleaded not guilty and elected trial in the High Court. Then on the 27th of December the appellant changed his election on the advice of his counsel at the time Mr. S. Singh.
\par 
\par The charge remained a single offence of Rape until the tr}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5788832 ial date when counsel for the }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
prosecution successfully sought to add a further 2 counts of Rape allegedly committed by the appellant on the same victim }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
... on a date }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 in 1988}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917  and }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 ... between the 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 st of January 1989 and 24th of May 1989}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
There is no record of the appellant being asked about the application to add the 2 extra counts nor does it appear as if the appellant was represented at the time but in any event he pleaded not guilty to all counts of Rape and elected trial in t
he Magistrates Court.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Then the following cryptic entry appears in the typed record of proceedings
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Accused had been earlier warned that case would be heard today and all prosecution w}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 itnesses are present for trial.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Reading as best I can between the lines it seems that at that stage the appellant had sought an adjournment which was refused by the trial magistrate. The exact nature and reasons for the application are nowhere recorded in the trial record however learne
d State Counsel (who also prosecuted the case in the Magistrates Court) confirmed that the appellant had unsuccessfully sought an adjournment in order to enable his counsel to attend the trial.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Thereafter the appellant's trial began and the prosecution cal
led 8 witnesses and tendered the two cautioned interview records of the appellant together with his charge statement and the complainant's birth certificate (Ex.2). This latter document revealed that the complainant was born on the 14th of November 1978 w
hich would have placed her age at under 12 years at the time she testified on oath in the trial.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 At the close of the prosecution's evidence the appellant elected to remain silent and the trial magistrate after a night's adjournment delivered a 3 paragraph 
judgment convicting the appellant who was then sentenced to concurrent terms of 2 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 \'bd }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 years imprisonment on each count.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 The appellant now appeals against both his conviction and sentence. He had lodged in person 2 separate letters in which he sets out 15 gr
ounds of appeal against his conviction. These may all be reduced to 3 principal grounds as follows}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 :}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-720\li1440\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 (1)\tab }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
That the trial magistrate erred in refusing the appellant's application for an adjournment thereby depriving him of the opportunity to be defended by counsel;}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-720\li1440\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (2)\tab 
That the trial magistrate erred in failing to ask the appellant if he had witnesses to call in his defence;}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-720\li1440\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (3)\tab The conviction is against the weight of the evidence and is}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 unsafe and unsatisfactory in the following respects}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 -}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-720\li2160\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (a)\tab The prosecution's evidence was fabricated and contradictory;}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-720\li2160\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2160\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (b)\tab The prosecution's expert witnesses were unqualified to testify;
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In advancing his first ground of appeal the appellant stated that he had sought an adjournment because he was unfamiliar with court procedures and wished to be represented by counsel.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Unfortunately, his counsel at the time Mr. T. Fa could not be present because he was ill in hospital and that was the reason he had asked for the adjournment. When his application was refused he wa
s left to his own devices (so to speak) and although he was given the opportunity to, he had not cross-examined any of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
the prosecution's principal witnesses because in his own words, he }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 didn't know what to do or ask of them}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 .}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In this latter regard it is 
a matter of record that of all 8 prosecution witnesses the appellant questioned only the nurse and even that solitary question elicited an answer seemingly unrelated to the substance of her evidence. Needless to say the complainant and 3 alleged eye-witne
sses were not cross-examined at all and their evidence for all intents and purposes remained unchallenged.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Section 188 of the Criminal Procedure Code Cap. 21 provides}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 :}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 

\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Any person accused of an offence before any criminal court, or against whom proceedings are instituted under this Code in any such court, may of right be defended by a barrister and solicitor.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Then Section 202 provides: (so far as relevant)
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Before ...... the hearing of any case, it shall be lawful for the court in its discretion to adjourn the hearing ...... }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Clearly a magistrate has a discretion to grant or refuse an adjournment. Equally such discretion must be judicially exercised in the interests of justice, with a view to the expeditious disposal of cases and in furtherance of an a
ccused's constitutional right to}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 :}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 I
n this case was the accused given that right when the trial magistrate refused his application for an adjournment? To answer this question let us examine the magistrate's ruling and the facts more closely.
\par 
\par Firstly, the ruling, in refusing the appellant's application it is not recorded that the prosecutor objected but the reasons that were recorded are that the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917 :}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3083917\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid3083917 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
accused had been earlier warned that the case would be heard today and all the prosecutions witnesses are present.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 With respect to the trial ma
gistrate I have examined all prior entries in the original handwritten records and am unable to find any such warning being given to the appellant and although the presence of all the prosecution's witnesses would have been a factor that militated against
 the adjournment of the case, I note that all the principal witnesses (including the nurse) live on the same island.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5788832\charrsid12140626 Mary Kings}{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid12140626 ton}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid1601487  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
(1948) 23 Cr. App. R. 183 which the appellant cited in his written submissions and in which the facts are almost identical to the prese}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5788832 nt case, the following relevant }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 headnote appears:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5788832 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid5788832 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15144565 \'93}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5788832\charrsid5788832 
On the trial of the appellant, counsel who had briefed for her defence, owing to a misunderstanding, was not present in Court. Other members of the Bar were present and available. The Judge d
eclined to postpone the trial or to accede to a suggestion made by counsel for the prosecution that one of the other counsel available should be asked to hold the brief of counsel who had been briefed for the defence, and the appellant was in the result t
ried as an unrepresented person. She did not cross-examine any of the witnesses for the prosecution, and though her rights were clearly explained to her by the Judge, did not go into the witness-box or make a statement from the dock or call any evidence.

\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid12140626 {\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid15144565 Held}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
 that the course adopted was tantamount to depriving the appellant of the right which she had to be defended by counsel, and the conviction must be quashed.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Then there was the amendment of the original charge by the addition of 2 further counts of Rape which occurred almost immediately before the trial began.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
This would have certainly taken the appellant by surprise and by its very nature would have necessitated at the very least additional instructions to counsel and possibly a change in defence tactics. Needless to say both courses would have necessitated an
 adjournment of the trial.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In this particular regard Section 214(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code provides (as paraphrased)}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 :}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Where an alteration of the charge is made (by the addition of 2 further counts) ..... the court shall, if it is of opinion that the accused has been thereby misled or deceived, adjourn the trial for such period as may be reasonably necessary.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par In addition Section 120(3) which deals with the joinder of several counts in a charge provides: (so far as relevant for present purposes)
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid15628084 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15628084 "Where before trial,\'85
the court is of opinion that a person may be embarrassed in his defence by reason of being charged with more than one offence in the same charge,\'85the Court may order a separate trial of any count or counts of such charge\'85"}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 It is clear
 to this court that at no time did the trial magistrate apply his mind to the above provisions for if he had done so he would have recorded it and more importantly it would have been clear to him that the appellant could not but have been misled or at lea
st been embarrassed in his defence by the addition of 2 further counts of Rape against the same complainant, one of which had not even been raised by the police in his interview during the investigations!}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Needless to say on the trial date the appellant (and presumably his counsel if he had appeared) would have come prepared only to defend one offence of Rape.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 The appellant's second ground of appeal is rounded on a passage which he cited from }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid15144565 Archbold}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15144565  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (34th-edition) at para. 549 and which is repeated in identical terms 3 decades later in Chapter 4 para. 392 of }{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid15144565 Archbold}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15144565  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (43rd edition) and which reads}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 :}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid15628084 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15628084 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12087184 
When a defendant is not defended by Counsel, the judge should i}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15144565 nform him of his right to cross-}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12087184 examine }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15144565 [sic] }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12087184 the witness for the prosecution, and, at the close of the prosecution, of his }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2448450 
right to give to give evidence on his own behalf or to make an unsworn statement }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2448450\charrsid15144565 and to cal}{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15144565\charrsid15144565 l}{
\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15144565  }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2448450\charrsid15144565 witnesses}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2448450 ." (my underlining)}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 More relevant however are the provisions o}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 f Section 211 of the Criminal }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Procedure Code which applies to all Magistrates Court trials in this country.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12140626 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 That Section provides inter alia:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid8210733 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8210733 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15628084 
At the close of evidence in support of the charge, if it appears to the court that the case is made out}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8210733  against the accused person sufficiently require to make a defence, the court shall\'85
inform him that he has a right to give evidence on oath from the witness box;\'85or to make a statement not on oath from the dock,\'85}{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8210733\charrsid6038055 
and shall ask him whether he has any witnesses to}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6038055  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8210733 examine or other evidence to adduce in his defence\'85." (my underlining)}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
The appellant complains that he was never informed of his right to call witnesses in his defence and although he claims he had witnesses to call he did not do so. This is evidenced, the appellant claims, by the absen
ce of any reference to the same in the Magistrates Court record of proceedings.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Brije Nand v. R.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid1601487  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Lautoka Cr. App. No. 3 1984 Cullinan J. had occasion t}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8210733 o }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
examine the above provision in the context of a similar complaint. In the course of his judgment his lordship said}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 :}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
I am in no doubt that the provisions of Sections 210 and 211 clearly place upon a magistrate a duty to inform the accused personally wheth
er or not a case has been made out against him ....... , and thereafter, under Section 211 to explain the charge to the accused once again, to explain the options open to him }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
and to ask him whether he has any witnesses to examine }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 or other evidence to adduc
e in his defence. That duty lies upon the magistrate whether or not the accused is represented by counsel.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12140626  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (my underlining)}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 and later in the same judgment his lordship in rejecting counsel's suggestion that the record be returned and the trial magistrate
 be asked if the record was correct (i.e. in its omission to record that the appellant had been asked if}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
he had witnesses to call) said}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 :}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
I see no basis for doing so. There might be some basis for such a course where the record has been challenged, by way
 of affidavit, by the appellant. That is not the case here. It is to be assumed that the record is correct. The learned trial magistrate has countersigned the record as being a true copy of the manuscript record, which latter I have also carefully examine
d.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Similarly in this case the trial magistrate has certified and countersigned the typed record as a true copy of the original.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Learned State Counsel however whilst not making the same suggestion nevertheless submitted that the accused's right to call witnesses was necessarily included in the 3 options given to the accused by the trial magistrate. With respect I cannot agree.

\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Sect
ion 211 expressly recognises only 2 of the so-called 3 options available to an accused person who is required to make a defence to a charge. The third option is not expressly referred to but is just as important and that is the right to remain silent whic
h was the option adopted by the appellant in this case.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In my view the entry in the trial record that appears at the close of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 the prosecution case and which reads}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 :}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
I find a case on all 3 counts to answer and give 3 options to accused. The accused elects to remain silent.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6038055 N}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 either expressly nor inferentially supports State Counsel's submissions on this ground of appeal.
\par 
\par In }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Joseph Carter}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid1601487  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
(1960) 44 Cr. App. R. 225 where the appellant was unrepresented owing to the absence of his counsel and where the court
 had refused an adjournment and the judge had failed to ask the appellant whether he wished to call any witnesses, the Court of Appeal in quashing the conviction said at p. 230:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
..... the appellant, unrepresented as he was did not in the result have a fair trial, and that it would be wrong in this case to apply the proviso.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In similar vein Cullinan, J. in }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid1601487 Brije }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Nand v. }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid1601487 R.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  (op.cit) in quashing the appellant's conviction in that case, said}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 :}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
..... the primary question for this court to decide is whether or not the appellant was properly tried. In my view he was not. I do not see how a court }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 can convict an accused without}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  ever putting him on his defence ..... Similarly if a prima facie}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 case is made out the accused must be informed of such and thereafter given full opportunity to present his defence, if any. To do any less than that is to deny an accused a fair trial.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 I do not see that the learned trial magistrate had power to record findings of
 guilty or convictions or to impose any sentence without first complying with the provisions of Section 211, 213 and 215 of the Code. Such findings, convictions and sentences must be regarded as nullities.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Then there is a further irregularity that occurr
ed in the proceedings to which State Counsel's attention was drawn in the course of the appeal and that was to the recorded fact that all the principal witnesses, who are students described as }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 children}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  by the trial magistrate, were permitted to give swor
n evidence in the trial without any prior recorded enquiry being conducted by the trial magistrate as to the witness' age, or her understanding of the nature of an oath or of the necessity to speak the truth.
\par 
\par Such an enquiry is implicitly required by the provisions of Section 10 of the Juveniles Act Cap. 56 the relevant part of which reads as follows}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 :}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Where in any proceedings against a}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12197528 ny person for any offence .....}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  any child of tender years called as a witness does not in the opinion of the court unders
tand the nature of an oath, his evidence may proceed not on oath, if, in the opinion of the court, he is possessed of sufficient intelligence to justify the reception of his evidence and to understand the duty of speaking the truth, and the evidence thoug
h not given on oath but otherwise taken and reduced into writing so as to comply with any law in force for the time being, shall be deemed to be a}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 deposition within the meaning of any law so in force}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 :}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Provided that where evidence is admitted by virtue of this section on behalf of the prosecution, the accused shall not be liable to be convicted of the offence unless that evidence is corroborated.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In this case the complainant was not 12 years of age when she testified in the trial and although the composite expression }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 child of tender years}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
 is nowhere defined in the Juveniles Act the term }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 child}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  is defined for the purposes of the Act as: }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
a person who has not attained the age of fourteen years.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Lal Khan}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid1601487  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (1981) 73 Cr. App. R.190 the Court of Criminal Appeal considered the English equivalent of our Section 10. The headnote to the case reads in part:}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5049419 H}{
\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid5049419 eld}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 : .... where, as in the present case, a 
young girl aged 12 was about to be called to give evidence, the judge should, in his discretion, have questioned her as to her understanding of the nature and solemnity of an oath in the presence and hearing of the jury; as this was not done, ....... it w
as not one for the application of the proviso ...... accordingly, the appeal would be allowed and the conviction quashed.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid1601487 {\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Per curiam}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid1601487 : }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Where there is an inquiry in the presence of the jury as to the understanding of a child witness of the nature and solemni
ty of an oath, questions put to the child should be recorded so that they appear in the official transcript of the trial.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 More recently in }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Fazal Mohammed v. The State}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid1601487  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (1990) 91 Cr. App. R. 256 an appeal from Trinidad and Tobago the Privy Council consider
ed a provision in identical terms to Section 10 of our Juveniles Act in the context of a trial in which a 13 year old girl was sworn after the trial judge had merely ascertained her age and the fact that she was a pupil at a Junior Secondary School.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In up
holding the Court of Appeal's ruling that the girl's evidence was inadmissible the Privy Council endorsed the settled practice that required a trial judge, in the case of a child under 14, to satisfy himself by appropriate enquiry that the child had suffi
cient understanding of the nature of the oath and the solemn obligation to tell the truth that it implied before allowing the child to give sworn evidence.
\par 
\par In the present case under appeal the trial record contains an answer of the complainant and another 
witness to the effect that they understood the nature; of the oath. The nature and details of their understanding however does not appear to have been canvassed at all and if it was (as State Counsel claimed in}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 the appeal) then it has not been recorded but
 in any event such an enquiry would have served no useful purpose as it would have occurred (if at all) after the witness had already been sworn.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 The nature and extent of the enquiry which a trial magistrate ought to conduct pursuant to Section 10 of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 the Juveniles Act was discussed by Dyke, J. in }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Suresh Chand v. R. }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Lautoka Criminal App. No. 77 of 1983 where the learned judge said}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 :}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid5049419 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5049419\charrsid5049419 
"There are a number of matters for determination and record by the court. The court must first determine the child's age, as t
hat is relevant to the issue of whether or not he is of tender years. If the child is of tender years, the court must then ascertain whether the child understands the nature of an oath. If the court is of the opinion that the child does understand the nat
u
re of an oath, such opinion should be recorded, in which case the child may be sworn. If the court is not of such opinion, that again is a matter of record. The court must then ascertain whether the child is possessed of sufficient intelligence to underst
a
nd the duty of speaking the truth and to justify the reception of his evidence. Again, if the court is of the opinion that the child is so possessed of sufficient intelligence, the court's opinion in the matter should be recorded, and the child may then. 
give unsworn evidence. If the court holds the contrary opinion, that should also be recorded and the child may not give evidence at all."
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5049419 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5049419\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
A more concrete example of the type of questions that might be asked in such an enquiry may be found in the recent Court of Appeal decision in }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 C.A.Z.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid1601487  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (1990) 91 Cr. App. R. 203 at p. 204.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
If I may say so this last irregularity is perhaps the most serious of all because if the necessary enquiries had been conducted in respect of all of the children concerned then it might have been that their evidence would have only been permitted to be gi
v
en not on oath, in which case these so-called corroborating eye-witnesses would themselves require to be corroborated and their evidence would be incapable of mutually corroborating each other or even the evidence of the complainant if she too had only be
en permitted to give unsworn evidence.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 D.P.P. v. Hester}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid7555735  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (1972) 57 Cr. App. R. 212 the House of Lords had occasion to consider Section 38(1) of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (U.K.) on which Section 10 of our Juveniles Act is based.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Lord Diplock expressed his view on the meaning and effect of the Section in the following passage in his judgment at p.245:
\par 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5049419 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
....... the section imposes an absolute prohibition upon conviction on the uncorroborated evidence of an unswo}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 rn}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  child.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Secondly, it expressly excludes as a permissible source of such corroboration the evidence of any other unsworn child.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Clearly then, in permitting all of the children to testify on oath without enquiry the trial magistrate ha
d, whether consciously or unconsciously, ignored the provisions of Section 10 of the Juveniles Act and effectively circumvented the need to consider any of the special matters relating to the corroboration of the testimony of unsworn witnesses referred to
 above.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
In doing so the trial magistrate has further ignored the many dangers so carefully outlined in the judgment of Lord Morris in }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 Hester's}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid7555735  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 case (op.cit) where he said at p.219:
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
The accumulated experience of courts of law, reflecting accepted general knowledge of the ways of the world, has shown that there are many circumstances and situations in which it is unwise to found settled conclusions on the testimony of one person alone
.
 The reasons for this are diverse. There are some suggestions which can readily be made, but which are only with more difficulty rebutted. There may in some cases be motives of self-interest, or of self-exculpation, or of vindictiveness. In some situation
s the straight line of truth is diverted by the influences of emotion or of hysteria or of alarm or of remorse. Sometimes it may be that owing to immaturity or perhaps to lively imaginative gifts there is no true appreciation of}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 the gulf}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 that separates trut
h from falsehood. It must, therefore, be sound policy to have rules of law or of practice which are designed to avert the peril that findings of guilt may be insecurely based. So it has come about that certain statutory enactments impose the necessity in 
s
ome instances of having more than one witness before there can be a conviction. So also has it come about that in other instances the Courts have given guidance in terms which have become rules. Included in such cases are those in which charges of sexual 
offences are made .... Also included in the types of cases above referred to are those in which children are witnesses.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
There remains the appellant's third and final ground of appeal which directly raises the merits of his conviction.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 This ground necessarily entails a careful consideration of the prosecution's evidence in the case and the judgment of the trial magistrate.
\par 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
In this latter regard State Counsel has not sought to support the form of the trial Magistrate's judgment only its conclusion. If I ma
y say so with that concession this Court entirely agrees. The trial magistrate's judgment if it can be called that does not begin to meet the minimum statutory requirements set out in Section 155 of the Criminal Procedure Code which provides so far as}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 relevant that}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 :}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
Every judgment shall ...... contain the point or points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision ........ }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 "
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 (See also: per Grant C}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14832052  J [sic]}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292  in }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 Chandar Pal v. R.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid3429240  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 20 FLR 1 at p.4)
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 With respect to the trial magist
rate it is improper to write a judgment merely accepting the prosecution's case and convicting an accused person without so much as a reference to the evidence led in the trial or to the demeanour and credibility of}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 the witnesses or without considering any
 material inconsistencies and contradictions in the witnesses evidence (if any), an leaving it instead to State Counsel and the Appellate Court to try and marshal] the evidence or fathom the magistrate's reasoning in seeking to support the conviction. Ind
eed so perfunctory is the trial magistrate's judgment that he did not even bother to record that he had c}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 onsidered all of the evidence.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Undoubtedly this was a case in which the only evidence before the trial magistrate was that which was produced by the pr
osecution and although it was untested by cross-examination that does not mean that the trial magistrate is thereby absolved from writing a judgment in compliance with the relevant statutory provision, on the contrary, the appellant had pleaded not guilty
 
to all 3 Counts at the beginning of the trial and had maintained his innocence throughout his police interview records (Exs. 3 and 4) and charge statement (Ex.5). Indeed in the course of one of his several interviews the appellant suggested that he had be
en }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 framed' and even offered motive for it.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In the circumstances, if anything, the absence of a cross-examination would ha
ve made it doubly incumbent on the trial magistrate to have fully and careful scrutinised the whole of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses before entering a conviction.
\par 
\par If the trial magistrate had done so he would not have blithely and blindly accepted the prosecution's evidence as he appears to have done in his judgment.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 He would have noted for instance that the only qualified medical witness who was called by the prosecution did not relate in his evidence what his detailed findings were when he ex
amined the complainant a month and a half after the last alleged incident other than a finding that her hymen was }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 not intact}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 , whatever that might mean.
\par 
\par Similarly, the evidence of the Staff Nurse, who examined the complainant 4 days after the last incide
nt, that the complainant's vagina admitted 2 fingers and that that was consistent with recent sexual intercourse is at best suspect when viewed in the light of her cross- examination and the complainant's own testimony of 2 prior instances of intercourse 
occurring in 1988 and early 1989 i.e. in this instance a plainly ruptured hymen is not necessarily evidence of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
sexual intercourse much less recent intercourse. We also do not know the exact nature or extent of the }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
vaginal injury' she detected or its possible cause and age.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Paula Tukana v. R.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid7555735  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Suva Cr. App. No. 39 of 1977 the former Chief Justice Sir Clifford Grant in quashing the appellant's conviction for Indecent Assault asked, in the absence of proper medical opinion of a }
{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 slight tear' observed in the complainant's hymen}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 :}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
...... was it of a nature that could have been caused by a young girl washing herself rather vigorously in that area, using toilet paper carelessly, or by some other innocent action, or was it consistent with attempted penetration by a finger or a penis}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 ."}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
Be that as it may the prosecution's evidence in this case was that sexual intercourse allegedly occurred between the complainant and the accused on 3 separate occasions - once in 1988 and twice in 1989 a
nd at 3 different locations - in the girl's toilet in the old classroom and lastly, in the new school building.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 More particularly, the complainant's evidence (assuming it can be believed) makes it clear that the first incident in October 1988 allegedly to
ok place in the girls' toilet; the second incident in early 1989 allegedly occurred in the old classroom and the third and final incident on the 25th of May 1989 was allegedly committed in the new school building.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Furthermore this being a sexual offence the trial magistrate properly looked for corroboration of the complainant's evidence which he found: }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 not only in the medical evidence but by eye-witness accounts of other children}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 
"}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 .
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 The medical evidence has been earlier dealt with in this judgment and in 
my view has been found to be wanting in several respects. There only remains the so-called eye witnesses' evidence to be considered.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In this latter regard the witnesses were (in order of call at the trial) Soko Filiti, Luisa Matoga and Esita Lesibulamai}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14832052 ki}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3429240 namuka.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8532843  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
I shall deal with each in turn and on the assumption that were all properly sworn.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Soko Filiti recalled that }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 on May 1989}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  she saw the accused having sex with the complainant whilst the complainant was lying on the floor naked and crying. This was
 in the old classroom. However as earlier related by the complainant in her evidence the May 1989 incident took place in the new school building. They could not both be correct unless there were 2 incidents in May 1989 but in that event the complainant's 
evidence that the 2nd incident occurred in early 1989 would be incorrect.
\par 
\par Luisa Matoga and Esita on the other hand allegedly witnessed the first incident. }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9446326 I say \'93allegedly\'94 because [sic]}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
 neither witness testif}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 ied to seeing any}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292  sexual}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 intercourse taking pla
ce between the complainant and the accused. At most the combined effect of their evidence is that they saw both the complainant and the accused naked in the girl's toilet and the complainant was crying. Both were later told by the complainant that the app
ellant had forcibly had intercourse with her in the girl's toilet.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Even in regard to their evidence the complainant's testimony is materially contradictory as the following passage in her evidence dealing with
 the first incident would tend to indicate, she said (in part):
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
..... he laid me on the ground he took off his clothes and he had sex with me. He put his private part into my part - it hurt me - I was bleeding -this happened at the girl's toilet - }{
\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid8913924 this }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 was seen by Luisa}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid7555735  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 -}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid7555735  }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 I saw Luisa see me at that time}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid7555735 . }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (my underlining)}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In the light of that categorical statement it seems surprising that neither Luisa or Esita actually testified to seeing the commission of the alleged offence and does not the }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 difference' reflect adversely on the credibility of the complainant? In any event assuming both girls were properly sworn can their}
{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735  evidence furnish corroboration}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 ? With respect to the trial magistrate I venture to think not.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 Lord Reid in }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 D.P.P. v. Kilbourne}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid3429240  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 (1973) 57 Cr. App, R. 381 in dealing with corroboration said at p.409:
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7555735 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid7555735 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
In ordinary life we should be and in law we are required to be careful in applying this idea. We must be astute to see that the apparently corroborat
ive statement is truly independent of the doubted statement. If there is any real chance that there has been collusion between the makers of the two statements, we should not accept them as corroborative. And the law says a witness cannot corroborate hims
elf.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1601487 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4404292 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
In so far as the third incident is concerned there does not appear to have been any corroborative eye-witness to the incident. The appellant's conviction on this Count rests solely on the undisputed evidence of the complainant.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 In the light of the s
everal irregularities that occurred in the appellant's trial and having regard to the misdirections of the trial magistrate in relation to the corroborative evidence the appellant's conviction must be considered unsafe and unsatisfactory.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 The appeal is accordingly allowed, the convictions quashed and the appellant discharged.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid4404292 
\par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4404292\charrsid7555735 (Appeal allowed; convictions quashed)
\par }}