The Archive · 1928

Difference Over First Charge

Judge Sir Peter Grain stated that Judge King was not in agreement fon the first charge, but the majority had decided that the convictions the fo, charges be upheld and the appeal dismissed.

Judge King said:—T regret to say that I am not in accord with the decision of the Jearned Appeal Judges on the firat charge ie. conversion of money and goods, It is true that in the sum. ming up the jury were informed of the nature of the charge and were asked to consider the reason for the advances to Verma and whether the accused was acting in a legitimate manner. But the various defences were not put to the jury.

There was not a clear distinction made in the summing up between this charge and the second charge. The jury were addressed at I the distinction partner and a clerk or servant might well have understood that if they found the accused was not a Partnr it followed he was gulfy the charge. Finally. there w definition of fraudulent. conversion given to the jury, particularly essen tial in view of the mature of th charges afd the character of the defence. "Tam of opinion therefore fon the above grounds that there Was in law-a misdirection of the jury by the learned trial Judge.

On the other hand with respect to the second charge ie, falsification of recounts T am in entire agreement with the Jearned Appeal Judges. The jury were clearly told that before they could find the accused. guilty of this charge it was tial that they should find he was clerk or servant and auch finding is in Inw for the determination of the Jury (R. v. Negus), Again the jury, who had in their' hands all the material exhibits she tries the subject of the fold that it was for their decision whether these entries were mide for the purpose of concealing from acmaster the true state of Whether in other words there was fraudulent, intent, the state of mind, the law requires, The accused was sentenced te two imprisonment on each of the Ywo charges such sentences to run concurrently and has appealed against the length of his sentence, d-! 1 see no reason fur any mitigation of the sentence.

Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.

Your account