{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f39\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;} {\f40\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f42\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f43\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f44\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);} {\f45\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f46\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f47\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\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\wrapdefault\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\tblind0\tblindtype3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\wrapdefault\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\s15\ql \fi1296\li0\ri0\sl360\slmult0 \widctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext15 Style 3;}{\s16\ql \li0\ri0\sl360\slmult0\widctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 Style 2;}{\s17\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext17 Style 1;}} {\*\rsidtbl \rsid8910\rsid92985\rsid198294\rsid207422\rsid530287\rsid724593\rsid1340649\rsid1729706\rsid1863308\rsid2579174\rsid2979755\rsid3236767\rsid3747770\rsid3759510\rsid5265180\rsid5918957\rsid6175960\rsid7471108\rsid7482731\rsid7694331\rsid8013134 \rsid8289534\rsid8730815\rsid8853726\rsid9308909\rsid10039035\rsid10640101\rsid11543619\rsid12386697\rsid13004073\rsid13377145\rsid13970477\rsid14625989\rsid15156922\rsid15204945\rsid16058132}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6850;}{\info {\operator maltungtung_l}{\creatim\yr2009\mo1\dy28\hr11\min18}{\revtim\yr2009\mo3\dy9\hr14\min39}{\version35}{\edmins218}{\nofpages5}{\nofwords1775}{\nofchars10119}{\nofcharsws11871}{\vern16393}{\*\password 00000000}}{\*\xmlnstbl {\xmlns1 urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags}}\paperw11678\paperh16598\margl2663\margr765\margt412\margb2696\gutter0 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\grfdocevents0\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\subfontbysize\formshade\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3 \jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot16058132 \fet0{\*\wgrffmtfilter 013f}\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 \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8910 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid8910 IN THE SUPREME COURT O}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910\charrsid8910 F}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid8910 {\*\xmlopen\xmlns1{\factoidname country-region}}{\*\xmlopen\xmlns1{\factoidname place}}FIJI}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910\charrsid8910 {\*\xmlclose}{\*\xmlclose} \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid8289534 (}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910\charrsid8289534 W}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid8289534 ESTERN DIVISION)}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910\charrsid8289534 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid8289534 AT LAUTOKA \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6175960 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910\charrsid8289534 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8910 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 Appellate Jurisdiction}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid8289534 Criminal Appeal No. 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910\charrsid8289534 44}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid8289534 of 1978 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6175960 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8910 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8289534 BETWEEN}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6175960 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8910 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910\charrsid8910 MAHENDRA PRASAD SHARMA \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 s/}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 o Chan Prasad Sharma \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 (}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 Appellant}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 )}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6175960 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8910 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 AND \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6175960 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8910 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910\charrsid8910 {\*\xmlopen\xmlns1{\factoidname City}}{\*\xmlopen\xmlns1{\factoidname place}}REGINA{\*\xmlclose} {\*\xmlclose} \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 (}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 Respondent}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 )}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid198294 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 Messrs S.R. Sha}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid724593 nkar, Counsel for the Appellant}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 Mr. Dyfed Williams, Counsel for the Respondent}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8910 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6175960 JUDG}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8910\charrsid8910 MENT \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid198294 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 \par The appellant was charged with 8 counts. They were in connect}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8730815 ion with transactions invol}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7694331 ving two Government cheques drawn}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 on the Bank of New Zealand, the first being cheque No. 88}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8730815 4}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 37 and the second being cheque No. 92579. The first four charges were concerned with the first cheque in respect of which it was alleged that the amount payable on it was unlawfully and fraudulently altered from 76c to $100.76 and the appellant was charged firstly with forging the cheque (i.e. making the alterations himself) secondly with uttering it knowing it to have been forged, thirdly with obtaining money from the cheque (i.e. $100.00 increase) by false pretences, and fourthly with larceny of the same $100.00. \par \par The last four charges were similarly in respect of the second cheque, which was alleged to have been unlawfully and fraudently altered from $6.89 to $716.89, and were again for forgery, uttering, obtaining by false pretences, and larceny.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9308909\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 He was convicted on counts 1-3 and counts 5-7 the magistrate making no order in respect of counts 4 and 8 because he said they were in the alte rnative. They were not stated to be in the alternative, but in effect they must be treated as alternatives. He w}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9308909 as sentenced to 1 year imprison}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 ment on counts 1 and 5 to run consecutively the sentences on the other counts being concurrent, so the total term of imprisonment amounted to 2 years. The appellant now appeals against his conviction and sentence.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9308909\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 One of the main grounds of appeal is that the magistrate erred in improperly accepting secondary evidence of the cheques. In fact the record shows a quite extra-ordinary state of affairs. P.W.1, who }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3236767 is an accountant with the Minis}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 try of }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid3236767\charrsid198294 Finance,}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 sought to produce photocopies of the two cheques concerned and this was immediately objected to by the defence since no proper foundation had been laid for the production of secondary evidence, and the non-prod}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid8013134 uction of primary evidence (i.e. }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 the cheques themselves). \par \par Because of course the best possible evidence must be produced and it is only after proof of loss or destruction, and after proof of proper and sufficient search in the most likely places that lesser evidence should be admitted, although in every case it is a question of fact whether in the circumstances of the case there was sufficient and proper search. \par \par See }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid5918957 Queen v. Inhabitants of {\*\xmlopen\xmlns1{\factoidname place}}Kenilworth}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 {\*\xmlclose} (1845) 7QBD 642, }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid5918957 Queen v. Rastrick 2 Cox}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1340649 (1846}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 ) 39. Almost inevitably the majority of cases on the subject are civil cases since in criminal cases usually more strict requirements are necessary. And cases of forgery where secondary evidence of the documents forged have been admitted must be very rare indeed, I was certainly not referred to any. When objection was made by the defence to the production }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5918957 of secondary evidence the magis}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 trate should have adopted the course recommended in }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5918957\charrsid5918957 P}{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid5918957 ritam Singh and Ujagir Singh v.}{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5918957\charrsid5918957 Me} {\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid5918957 wa Singh}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 Cr App No 47 of 1957 that is he should have ruled on the admissibility of the secondary evidence before proceeding with the trial, and he shou}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5918957 ld not admit evidence subject t}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid92985 o objection or give him}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 self power to reject i}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5918957 t later. What he purported to d}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 o is shown in the record where he said "Before ruling I will hear evidence as to original and as to why it is not produced as as to preparation of copy. Counsel invited to submit further at close of case."}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5918957\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 He permitted the witness to produce a photocopy of the first cheque No. 88437, and the witness then went on "I am shown a photocopy of what appears to be the reverse of cheque 88437."}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13004073\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1729706 He gave eviden}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 ce that he had, before sending them to the police taken photocopies of both sides of each c}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1729706 h}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 eque, and had taken both cheques and photocopies to the Central Police Station. He said he gave cheque No. 92 579 and the photocopies (i.e. obverse and reverse) of that cheque to Inspector Ramrakha, and then gave the other cheque No. 88437 and the other two}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1729706 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 photocopies (i.e. obverse and reverse) to Police Constable Ramesh. It was certainly unfortunate that the cheques were separated so early}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1729706 in the investigation, and they w}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 ere not marked for identification in an}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1729706 y way. He then was shown a photo}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 copy of cheque 92579 but whether this was obverse and reverse is not indicated. He claimed that the photocop}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1729706 ies shown to him were identical}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 to those photocopies handed over by him to the police. He did not say that they were the same photocopies and the significance of this appears later.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1729706\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 The photocopies }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2579174 of the two cheques were marked M}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 .F.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2579174 1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 and M.F.2. Detective Inspector Ramrakha gave evidence of receiving the cheque}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2579174 } {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 No. 92}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2579174 5}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 79 and photocopies. He said M.F.2 was the photocopy he received.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2579174\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 Police Constable Ramesh similarly gave evidence of recei}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13377145 ving cheque No. 88437 and photo}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 copies, putting both cheques and four photocopies in an envelope an}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13377145 d sending them to Detective Cor}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 poral Raju (as he then was) at Lautoka. \par \par Detective: Ser}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13377145 g}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 eant Raju gave evidence as to the receipt of the cheques and pho}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13377145 tocopies. He did not say what h}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 e did w ith the cheques but said he put the photocopies in the police file. He said that M.F.1 is what received, M.F.2 he had prepared later. In }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13377145 M.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 F.1 photocopies of the obverse and reverse of the cheque had been stuck to}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13377145 g}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 ether although there was no explanation for this. The record then says "Evidence of this witness concluded so far as receipt of M.F.(1)}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13377145 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 is concerned - M.F.1}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13970477 (obverse) produced as Exhibit \lquote }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 D}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13970477 \rquote }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 ". \par \par There was no ruling as to its }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2979755\charrsid198294 admissibility}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 and whether what the magistrate meant was that M.F.1 was now admitted in evidence is not clear,}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2979755 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 and since Exhibit }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2979755 \lquote D\rquote }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 as included in the list of Exhibits includes M.F.1 and M.F.2, it is extremely confusing. This confusion persists since some later witnesses refer to Exhibit D, some to M.F.1, and some to M.F.2. Exhibit }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid207422 D sometimes seems to embrace M.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 F.1 and M.F.2 and it was never clear how the expression was used. There was certainly no other reference to M.F.2 being produced as Exhibit D or any other Exhibit.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid207422\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 After Detective Sergeant Raju another witness, the Post master from Raki Raki was called and after he had given his evidence Det Sgt Raju}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11543619 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 was re}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11543619 called to continue his evidence.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 Later still after other witnesses further police witnesses were called to try to show the history of the two cheques and the ph}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11543619 otocopies. They were presumably }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 kept, or intended to be kept in an envelope in the exhib}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11543619 it store and there were several}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 changes in personnel in charge of the exhibits till someone found that the two cheques were missing from the envelope. No one ever said what happ}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11543619 e}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 ned to the photocopies and no one seemed to be clear whether the envelope was sealed all or most of the time}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5265180 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 or whether it remained unsealed. Then Police Constable Ram Sami said he was ordered to ch eck all the exhibits and he checked the contents of all the envelopes. That was the only direct evidence as to the disappearance of the cheques and of any search for them. Does that mean that only the envelopes in the exhibit store were checked? I would h ave thought that if}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5265180 im}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 portant exhibits like those were found to be missing not only the exhibit store but the whole police station would have been turned upside down }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5265180 in}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 an attempt to find them. \par \par During his address Counsel for the appellant again raised objection to the production of secondary evidence of the cheques.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15204945\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 In his judgment the magistrate said "when th}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15204945 e prosecution first attempted t}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 o adduce these (i.e. photocopies of the cheques) in evidence counsel for the defence objected on the ground that they were not admissible. I held that, in principle, the two photocopies could be admitted as secondary evidence and no}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15204945 w}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 set out my reasons for so finding."}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15204945\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 This was untrue. In the first place the magistrate said that before ruling he would hear evidence as to the original and why it was not produced. Thereafter nowhere in the record is there anything to show that the magistrate did make a ruling or did formally (or informally) agree that the photocopies could be admitted as secondary evidence. Then, when in h is judgment he was explaining why he admitted the photocopies, he says "Therefore before a copy of a written instrument or parole evidence of its contents, can be received as proof, the absence of the original instrument }{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid10640101 must}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 be accounted for, by proving (i n this case) that is lost or destroyed," and later he says "From their evidence I am satisfied beyond a reasonable dou}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15204945 b}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 t that the originals of the two cheques were lost and I accordingly hold that photocopies thereof could be admitted in evidence." But now here in his judgment does he refer to the other necessary requirement before secondary evidence may be admitted i.e. "due and proper search." \par \par Then to make matters worse, having admitted the photocopy of che}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15156922 que 92579 in evidence, it trans}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 pired that the pho tocopy was not even the photo- \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15156922 copy prepared by P.W}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 .1, but another prepared by Det Sgt Raju, and because there was confused evidence about this and clearly mistaken identification by the witnesses, the magistrate then said "the chain required for the produ ction of cheque No. 92579 (sic) for $716.89 was broken and its admissibility in evidence was, albeit unwittingly nullified. Obviously, the truth of the matter is apparent but the }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15156922 rules as to production of docum}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 ents are strict. Nevertheless, as I ha}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15156922 ve said above parole evidence of}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 the content of any original of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15156922 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 a document is admissible provided the absence of the original is accounted for."}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15156922\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 So now we have the magistrate proceeding not even on the basis of a photocopy of the cheque alleged to}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10039035 have been forged, but deciding}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 that he could proceed on parole evidence of the cheque, and the forgery.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid10039035\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 State Counsel has, in my opinion quite properly, not sought to justify the procedure adopted by the magistrate, or the admittance of parole evidence o f one of the cheques, but suggests that if the matter had been dealt with properly secondary evidence would have been admissible and suggests that the appellant was not prejudiced.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7482731 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 I am afraid I cannot accept that proposition. As the evidence came out, the confusion over the photocopy of cheque 92579 would have precluded the admittance of that piece of evidence. And it is impossible to say now that if the magistrate had properly dir ected his mind to the principles governing the admissibility of secondary evidence in such a case as this at the time when he should}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7482731 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 have done it, he would necessarily have admitted the evidence. With the exclusion of secondary evidence, surely the case wou ld have taken a quite different turn. I cannot really believe that the magistrate would at that stage have seriously considered allowing parole evidence of the cheques and the forgeries. I would like to think that his reliance on parole evidence in his ju dgment was only a mistaken and very belated attempt to justify his wrongful admission of secondary evidence in the first place. Surely once secondary evidence was excluded the prosecution would have fallen flat, the appellant would have had no case to }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7482731 answer}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 ,}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7482731 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 and there would have be}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7482731 e}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 n no element of self incrimination, the whole history of the trial would necessarily have been different.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid7482731\charrsid198294 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 Objection was taken by defence counsel to the admission of other documents, but it is unnecessary to deal with these point s in detail. It is sufficient that I find for the appellant in the matter of secondary evidence of the cheques. This was so fundamental a matter that clearly it is impossible to be satisfied that there was a fair trial and I have no option but to set asid e the convictions and sentences on all counts. \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1863308 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1863308 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid3759510 (Sgd.) G.O.L. Dyke}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1863308\charrsid3759510 \par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid1863308 JUDGE \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid198294 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1863308 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 LAUTO}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1863308 KA}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid198294\charrsid198294 , \par 7th February, 1979. \par }}