089-NLR-NLR-V-71-P.L.-PREMADASA-and-3-others-Petitioners-and-THE-QUEEN-Respondent.pdf
Prtmadaaa v. The Queen
42d
1967Present: Slrimane, J.P.L. PREMADASA and 3 others, Petitioners, and THE QUEEN,
Respondent
S. C. 213 A-D /67~Application for Bail under Section 31 of the CourtsOrdinance in M. C. Trincomcdee, 2660
Courts Ordinance—Section 31—Application for bail thereunder—“ Good cause Shownto the contrary".
In an application for bail under Section 31 of the Courts Ordinance—
Held, that, when a case is added to the calendar at a stage when t here is notenough time to summon witnesses, there is “ good cause shown to the contrary •*within the meaning:of the Section. .
Application for bail.
»
Mangdla Munasinghe, with Percy Karunaratne, for the Petitioners.
J.B. Mi Perera, Crown Counsel, for the Attorney-General.
430
•SIRIMANE, J.—Premadasa v. the Queen
June 26, 1967. Sirimane, J.—
This is an application for bail under Section 31 of the Courts Ordinance.It is common ground that the indictment was served on the accused on19.4.67 and that the Eastern Sessions had opened on 18.4.67 and weredue to close on 6.5.67.
The earliest date on which the accused could have been brought totrial after the lapse of 14 days from the date of service of the indictmentwas 4.5.67, which was 2 days before the sessions were due to close. Atthe instance of the defence the case had been fixed for trial on 2.5.67.But the prosecution had not been able to serve summons on its principalwitness who had changed his address. It is not denied that theprosecution made another effort to serve summons on this witness bysending the summons through a special police officer and acceded to thedefence request to fix the case for trial on the 3rd of May. Summonshowever could not be served on that witness.
The accused therefore has not been brought to trial at the firstCriminal Sessions at which he might have properly been tried and primafacie he is entitled to bail. But I think in this case the Crown has shown'good cause against the granting of bail.
As Sansoni, J. pointed out in The Queen v. Sunderam x, when acase isadded to the calendar at a stage when there is not enough time tosummon witnesses there is “ good cause shown to the contrary ” withinthe meaning of Section 31. The application is refused.
Application refused.