Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Hassanali Walji v. R., Crim. App. 127—68, 22/3/68, George C. J.



Hassanali Walji v. R., Crim. App. 127—68, 22/3/68, George C. J.

Accused was convicted of using insulting language likely to cause a breach of the peace and of a corrupt transaction [Penal Code s. 89(1); Prevention of Corruption Ordinance, Cap. 400, s. 3(2)].The first count was based on evidence that he had used insulting language about TANU, annoying persons in a shop. It was further alleged that he had offered the local TANU Chairman Shs. 50/- as an inducement not to report the matter to the Area Commissioner. In applying for bail pending appeal to the High Court, accused alleged “special circumstance”, in that he suffered from a urinary affliction requiring  long treatment and possibly hospitalization; the Prison Mekical Officer, however, had certified that he could be treated while in custody, and hospitalized if necessary. Accused also argued that his appeal was very likely to succeed on the second count, and cited cases with argument that the High Court found fairly persuasive.

            Held: (1) Illness, in this case, is not a “special circumstance”, because of the availability of facilities for accused ’s treatment while in custody. (2) While accused ’s arguments are not without merit, “it is only where the strongest possible case for success is made out that  the Court ought to grant bail …..” Where “ a short and simple point of law” seems likely to be dispositive of an appeal, bail may be granted. But the test is always whether an appeal “has an overwhelming chance of success”, and the test is not met “(W)here an argument of the facts needs detailed references to the text of the evidence or the judgment to support it ….. Application denied. 

Post a Comment

0 Comments