Amendment of section 56.
Amendment of section 65B.
Amendment of section 65C.
Repeal and replacement of sections 74, 75 and 76,
10. Section 56 of the principal Ordinance is amended by- (a) deleting "In cases where the right of reply depends upon the question whether evidence has been called for the defence, the" and substituting the following-
***The***
(b) renumbering it as subsection (1) thereof; and
(c)
**le). 1964,
c. 34. × (0)
inserting the following new subsection-
(2) Upon the trial of any person charged with an offence-
(a) the prosecution shall not be entitled to the right of reply on the ground only that the Attorney General or the Solicitor General appears for the Crown at the trial; and
(b) the time at which the prosecution is entitled to exercise the right shall, notwithstanding any rule of law, be after the close of the evidence for the defence and before the clos- ing speech (if any) by or on behalf of the person charged.".
11. Section 65B of the principal Ordinance is amended by inserting, after subsection (7), the following new subsection-
“(8) In this section, “court" includes the District Court and a magistrate.".
12. Section 650 of the principal Ordinance is amended by inserting, after subsection (4), the following new subsection-
"(5) In this section, “court" includes the District Court and a magistrate.".
13. Section 74, 75 and 76 of the principal Ordinance anc repealed and replaced by the following
"Acquittal
on grounds of Insanity. 1964, c. 84,
1883.
c. 38, 1, 2
74. Where in an indictment any act or omission is charged against any person as an offence, and it is given in evidence on trial of such person for that offence that he was insane, so as not to be responsible according to law for his actions at the time when the act was done or the omission made, then, if it appears
Linfitness to plead, 1984. c. 84,
1964. f. 84, 1. 802.
to the jury before whom such person is tried that he did the act or made the omission charged. but was insane as aforesaid at the time when he did or made the same, the jury shall return a special verdict that the accused person is not guilty by reason of insanity.
75. (1) Where on the trial of a person the ques- tion arises (at the instance of the defence or otherwise) whether the accused person is under disability, the following provisions shall have effect.
(2) The court, if having regard to the nature of the supposed disability is of opinion that it is expedient so to do and in the interests of the accused person, may postpone consideration of the said question (here- inafter referred to as "the question of fitness to be tried") until any time up to the opening of the case for the defence, and if before the question of fitness to be tried falls to be determined the jury return a verdici of acquittal on the count or each of the counts on which the accused person is being tried that question shall not be determined.
(3) Subject to subsection (2), the question of fit- ness to be tried shall be determined as soon as it arises. (4) The question of fitness to be tried shall be determined by a jury; and-
(a) where it falls to be determined on the arraignment of the accused person, then if the trial proceeds the accused person shall be tried by a jury other than that which deler- mined that question:
(b) where it falls to be determined at any later time it shall be determined by a separate jury or by the jury by whom the accused person is being tried, as the court may direct.
(5) Where in accordance with subsection (2) or (3) it is determined that the accused person is under disability, the trial shall not proceed or further proceed.
(6) In this section "verdict of acquittal" does not include a special verdict that the accused person is not guilty by reason of insanity.