Regina v Hanif [1973] FijiLawRp 4; [1973] 19 FLR 16 (7 June 1973)

(1973) 19 FLR 16

SUPREME COURT OF FIJI

 

REGINA

v

MOHAMMED HANIF

[SUPREME COURT, 1973 (Grant J.) 7^th June]

Criminal Jurisdiction

Criminal law – evidence – identify – identification of accused at police station – principles to be observed.

Criminal law – evidence – refreshing memory – circumstances in which witnesses may refresh their memory in and out of court.

Criminal law – witness – circumstances in which witnesses may refresh their memory in and out of court.

In its decision on a submission of no case to answer the Court enumerated the precautions to be observed where a witness was brought to identify a suspected person, and also ruled on the propriety of prosecution witnesses refreshing their memory in and out of court.

Cases referred to:
R v Davies & Cody,  [1937] HCA 27;  57 C.L.R. 170.
Craig v The King,  [1933] HCA 41;  49 C.L.R. 429.
R v Atter [1956] The Times, March 22; [1956] Crim. L.R. 289.
R v Mills  [1962] 3 All ER 298;  [1962] 1 WLR 1152.
R v Woodcock [1963] The Times, Feb. 20.
R v Yellow and Thay, Birmingham Assizes, December 1932.
Lau Pak Ngam v The Queen, Hong Kong Cr. App. 488 of 1965; [1966] Crim. L.R. 443.
R v Richardson  [1971] 2 WLR 889; [1971] 2 All ER 773.
R v Mullins, 3 Cox’s Crim. Cases 526
Gleed v Stroud  [1962] CLJ 161
R v Bryant and Dickson, 31 Cr. App. R. 146; 110 J.P. 267.
Doe v Perkins  (1790) 100 E.R 838.

Ruling on submission of no case to answer at a trial in the Supreme Court on indictment for uttering a forged document, and obtaining property on a forged document.

G Trafford-Walker for the Crown
S M Koya for the accused

GRANT J: [7^th June 1973]-