D Ged of Caterina! Gates or : ‘reerpars Joykcisbos obtio Gort. of West Boass! Libres ~we CheOH, 279 Bye 2 ers 4 i ‘i ‘ adnithig, Ti, Madgferty weigh oridonve which starts with wa usmump- O repen OF the,genfral bud oharacter of the priwuers, Tu Fy an indo f Tne cay * Rog. v. pybting under snction #18 of the Crimiseal Lronedure Coie (Let dino Toy fhinndde, XEV of 951) to dotiraing thet of mtu BG RE aan hpi It is noceury thet wiles shoul bo ten quitteds. W. BO. / . tine ay } A Toso ound da priggtonn anonpions ttoiation is mo komt ee lle” ein. the nvenoingg OC wetion 05 uF Ua ABER AM Tree! Grtninn! Prooeiuee Goode (acl XXV-of IUD). le” LR ABL:S.0. thoy nutter of Mohovehunlw Boouurje. Keg 3BS.W.R.Or BL Pyrmachunder Bonnerjee, A Taher of 1 modieal officer expressing an opiuion ia nut uvideuos aaler inee "ections BR and Reg, vy. Kaminee ** Raed! Does, 28 WR, eee [Acl RXV of 1301). Gr. R28, Doccments whieh were tendered in the Civil sait, if veliet on inn Kartick Pruiroution tor giving tole evidence met be proved conker “Bolte fn tho Cranial Court ufo Bay gu be novel ay others, 9.8,W.B. cr, “Cnet fie fences B58. nd, by Uneaoniig of the Cot stoning’ that. Ye ‘rials in he mots S ewmipeboit too Reg. v. Khyroollah ileus for or mguivat her hiss, ox us ot at race & others, 6 8. WR. yy penn tried qointly with her itwende es Gr RL; B.C. BE. 8 (iia see nw weetion 120 uf the Bvidones A R. Sup. Vol. Ap. 11, of 1872}. . FB . Mir ot Ryidenge telson on He tiv? of one prisonor wrongly niinitted ae faker (escr on the trial of anuthos, Intoxietions wronty Reg. v. Zalfukar snted as nm agsgtation of offence, = Rhee 8B. LR. Ap, MONO US Ha uatgTarution oF offence. 21; 80.168. W. B or. 36 Evidence ot aera Tudors suming sp —Fridens of goin mp bial unrastir—Tauproper wwluvesion uf Hsitbaus — ont eee Dlachargs of Drloonoe oi uppua-dteordinggejond R. Ap. 108; 8. 615 $ WR.CnR ST. AV of the Cady of Cetninal Bro. 3° 280 ‘DICERT OF ORI Recoguition of thingy nat efor the eyes of og, v, Wiasanmny °¥Ueae" gutta a prrson Jonmten a others, g “Poesestign of thoad thitgs, 5. .0r B16 Loe "Wee ph om i Reg. v. Nabadwip flat, ia hangs iat ems UREA sue rat pat 0. Gr 15. * ‘not be piven that the olticar Shela ousinr ea at [The eomiuont-tookf tho Bal Canse Couch, Sent, i aati egy aa a nh Oa Sl a co OBL Bag. Cordray Reg. v Slibehandra, Das, 6 Ri it, 115 te duty of «Seoions Tage to yive x sumizaup of the vee 48 recorded tefore hin, anil to hate Mis ous ere Fey Ramah Ras, Freund elon vison gui TS W.R Cre, 25,” fr cousilring & prismioe guity, Couseion quqshe, the tcraad not having been alow an opp ena Rog. v, Roboooompe fY '9 cousin certain wisn Banarjee, 3 6. W.IR, En ; ner eae, is nok evidhmes fn x suhee~ Y-Nobo Kite eut cave in whic. ho is“emomiuel onoon ety Shore cvttin perbious af x poies officer's diy any eed a even ieainst bin teeton, Eee went, Prout, tet XXV of Wi dae awh bee tke wajning the portions go vee, Sumiingnip te ean eeguntane, ple sesame ole uteger ta edna a hg . cmt made by him before here ete Reet Hom 4B hour fal 9 evidence fe ahem chic an deat rus i tnnot under tin Te ee 12.8. W.R. Or. R68. Ge ire deere aan lane ig bom comniléer ue size of tho loro Sraone A fogneee sun ‘ie cently satomenny a tae ake J EVIDENCE. 281 fae, reports aye not evidence oxcept- against the reporting police x v. Mfadun tiger... S at 4a Gr. * a A: i & Sr ehich: does nut-support a contietinn on a criminal cbange, (Reg. ¥. ‘afi, vant just a remoyal from 9 profession, (ie f dhoo Bos, ‘ge: Present-tase Being that of a mockteat). Ror. B. gy Nah. © quilted, Y this ef substance Af a report from a subordinate modied officer with an 5 A expression of, coucmrrenco by his muparior, exnnt be zhintamonee Nye, fend in oridence undor wvction 308. of the. Cole ot petitioner, 118. W. Criminal Procedure. (Act S¥V of 1861). ‘The de- BR Or B 2. position of person murdered? taken before Muagis- truto, and the medieal ovidence should he wnoosel to’ the Seasiona rooed. ‘Where the evidence of pitmesses gyren ie provior rial wag read + es ee re areca ti wan at > og tmmennn GH RO AF a emcn aebad ce Ot yiteres Pr aaa 9,138 W, CzAainod de nove, the High Court destined fo inter tudhikearse, 13 8.W. foro, with referoes to sections 426 apd 139, Code of ‘R, Gr. R 40. Criminals Procedure (Act XV of 1861}, as the ievegutarity of procedara was gue by which the prisouens were mut peo judicod. ‘The identification of at accused after the evidenes for lho prosecution Tontee & others, free iy notte to dow Sha "eit ve petitioners, 18 8.W. ghcir oaths at the time they mute the iden BR. Or. R 33., tion, i Twin cane of mundes, the sists mae ly the dora n once of his neighbours and of a lend. constable! eee eee admitted as rdesunt eridence, under section 32,” akoor g others, 19. A ct'T of 1872, that section providing, thet ruch B,W.R.OFR 44 nent is relevant whether the person who mttyice statement was or fine aut ut the tine when it was made wider expectation of death, ‘When the evidence fan, sbaont witnens is adittod undov getion 33 jan alina of tke Bvidoneo Act, 572, the growaud for ite od- Reg. v, Mowjan O88 juinsion should bé stated fully aad cleanly, to euoble jane Khaw, the High Court to jndgee of the proptiely of its arhnis. W.R. Or. B. 69, i ‘x the preneat case, the High Court eousi- dored that the evidence of an absent witnevefbad been improperly admitted, Troeange there was nothing to show how that by ordinary care id the 10 of ordinury meuns the witngss could not Lave been produced, Tn ontex to make a deposition aadssible under tho gection 93, thera mnt be evidence tat the secased perwon did, in fuct, have an Opportunity of vruss-ox- amining.