C.O.
NIK DI JINO
Jaunių mi din ("adun
mrs beulah al
wing ni no¡JOSCUT,
-Mad Demons V-Immo.
OP Y.
#T (6)
padeinargti. To
manol o Inks not buee vinc
C.
scomtng to evindeli
1. Jos a
KO MULA $IIn to
vion scene david bo-
Liðsetning ná don
i
POLU Mİ
de mi war nelie que sus sivilgn
HOA, DOVE HA IIe vojno
•
20 BROLS TOf .zyot-
www I enen. Ikapou
Wouw De any noucieb nuz
to noiinilm ond ni tule ni
- Jadey al... out (9)
Jí
# of
ost pa mi tuwig as provoq ON HA JI000 Ebu unidou Jamnaoïq ja vir--to unalni don si Jalog
ni deci i AJ JR:
up to Jíry a 19. note 16 ga að au Djedh noong Teddzwi, amon ... au noiriban sül maviy «Who văn dies) en 19.1% mevo nuqtoO na Dumluran naniog
JI.WJITE... VM di Jafoq old mine won n. I un move cuË [jonwod-ni-maß ad onlumu qu viuno domu sud 11 Intoduol grey ei ár: o¶ yan. I ans) (hun!' ud eni.ru Liwoo di 1, prøve ons Ila da to ev. mind no. 10119 μd dowsin "#duojowe weer bill of exten bluor si voi 10 H, Telido eta shound (exenyisnot invosdung noitua no ni to sbios. OF JINOU BUJ 101 ZINA Tim tjemenare ou .doggor dan . i macvoy eill beomote sal (omeja, mill Jand Ilimous mnob (,CE)
./ menad-ye: OJJA
Enclosure 3.
Hon. Colonial Secretary,
4333
156
REC2 Read 6 FEB 13)
1. In further reply to your recent communication as to
the position in the case in which the Sepoy Ibrahim was charged
with the murder of Subedar Ali Shafa I now beg to inform you that,
as I always anticipated, the matter has at last been brought to a
conclusion against the prisoner so far as the Courts here are
concerned.
2. You will recollect that in my last communication
dealing with this matter I mentioned that the Full Court had re-
-served certain points for decision but had not at the date of my
writing given its judgment. On Monday the 9th. instant it decided,
as I thought it would, against the prisoner.
3. Sentence was however deferred as Mr. Jenkin who
appeared for the prisoner intimated that he proposed to apply for
a writ of habeas corpus and for leave to appeal to the Privy
Council. The Court fixed the 16th. instant for the hearing of
these applications. Yesterday, accordingly, they came on. The
application for habeas corpus (which I thought was an absurd application) the Court dismissed. The Chief Justice then proposed to pass sentence of death on the prisoner but Mr. Jenkin then took
(what was to my mind an equally untenable course) the procedure of
moving to arrest the judgment: this motion the Court also rejected
and the prisoner was then duly sentenced to death.
4. With regard to the question of appeal to the Privy
Council I pointed out to the Court that I did not think that in a Criminal case the Court had any power to grant any leave to appeal when, as in this case, the application to appeal is in forma pauperis. With my latter contention the Court entirely agrees: with the former, which is in this case really academic, I think it also agrees. The only possibility now is for the prisoner's legal representatives to apply to the Privy Council for special leave to appeal. This they have declared their intention of doing and accordingly the Chief Justice has in sentencing the prisoner
ordered that the sentence should not be carried into effect until
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.