Criminal practice and procedure-appeal-appeal against conviction and sentence-the appellant was convicted on robbery with violence and assault causing actual bodily harm and convicted accordingly-identification evidence-whether the evidence adduced was sufficient to secure a conviction in the circumstances of the case-whether the appeal had merit-Penal Code section 251, 296 (2)

.

.

.

Criminal law - robbery with violence - second appeal against sentence of death - evidence – identification evidence-where the circumstances were unfavorable for identification- whether the evidence of identification was reliable - whether the trial court had properly exercised its duty to analyze the evidence on record –whether the appeal could be allowed - Penal Code section 296(2)

Criminal Practice and Procedure- Robbery with violence- appeal against conviction and sentence –appeal on the ground that the provisions of section 200 Criminal Procedure Code had not complied with-where the appellants had not been informed if their rights to recall witnesses after a new magistrate had taken over the case-–whether the trial was defective for non compliance with section 200 CPC-whether a retrial could be ordered for the public interest in the maintenance of order and safety in society - section 296 (2) of the Penal Code

Evidence-identification evidence - identification of the appellants by a single witness - duty of the court to be cautious in such circumstances- whether identification by a single witness was safe-whether conviction on robbery with violence could be set aside

Criminal Law-robbery with violence-first appeal against conviction and sentence-evidence-identification evidence-evidence of a single identifying witness-whether the evidence on in the identification and recognition of the appellants was reliable

CRIMINAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - stealing by servant - accused charged and convicted of the offence - appeal against sentence - Penal Code section 281

CHARGE - framing of the charge - where the dating on the charge made it appear that it had been placed before the occurrence of the offence - effect of - whether this prejudices the appellant - whether the court can uphold a conviction from such a charge

EVIDENCE - expert witness - appellant contends that the court wrongly relied on the evidence of a person who was not a witness -“ where the evidence on the theft was not given by a certified public accountant - criteria to be used in determining who is an expert witness - applicable principles - whether the court can rely on the evidence adduced to sustain the conviction

[Ruling] Civil Practice and Procedure-extension of time -application seeking extension of time to file an appeal to the Provincial Disputes Appeal Tribunal-where the applicant claimed that he was not able to file an appeal within the prescribed period because of his sons sickness and financial constraints-where the Land Disputes Tribunal Act provided for thirty days within which to prefer an appeal to the Provincial Appeals Committee where the applicant took three years to bring the application -whether the High Court had jurisdiction to extend time as sought-whether the application was merited-Section 8(1) of the Land Disputes Tribunal Act, Sections 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act