Supreme Court dismisses appeal as no appeal lies against preliminary inquiry rulings under Criminal Procedure Law.
Zypern (CY)
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against a District Judge's ruling to hold a preliminary inquiry for a police sergeant charged with two counts of unlawful association. The appellant argued that the ruling was a 'decision' subject to appeal under the Courts of Justice Law, 1960, while the prosecution contended the counts were properly joined under the Criminal Procedure Law. The court held that the general appeal provision in the Courts of Justice Law is subject to the Criminal Procedure Law, which explicitly limits appeals to specific judgments or orders, thereby excluding preliminary inquiry rulings from this statutory appeal path.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiertCourts of Justice Law, 1960 s. 25(2); Criminal Procedure Law Cap. 155 s. 131(1): The general right of appeal against every decision in criminal jurisdiction is subject to the Criminal Procedure Law, which restricts appeals to specific judgments or orders, excluding preliminary inquiry rulings.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertVolltext
[*935] 1970 August.25
(VASSILIADES, P., TRIANTAFYLIIDES, STAVRINIDES, JJ.)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Evangelos Christophi,
Appellant,
v.
The Police,
Respondents.
(Criminal Appeal No. 3190).,
Criminal Procedure - Practice - Appeal - Joinder of Counts - Objection before commencement of preliminary
inquiry - Ruling - Courts of Justice Law, 1960 (Law 14 of 1960) s. 25(2) and the Criminal Procedure Law Cap. 155 ss, 131-153 - No appeal lies.
Construction of statutes - 'Decision' in section 25(2) of the Courts of Justice Law, 1960 (Law of 1960).
A. Myrianthis, for the Appellant.
A. Frangos, Senior Counsel of the Republic, for the Respondents.
JUDGMENT
The judgment of the Court was delivered by:
VASSILIADES. P.; The appellant before us is a police sergeant, 38 years of age, who was charged together [*936] with anotherperson in the District Court of Limassol on a charge containing two counts. The first count concerns the other person (the first accused in the proceedings) charging him with the offence of holding an office in an unlawful association contrary to section 56(2) of the Criminal Code, Cap.
154 the second count concerns the appellant, charging him with the offence of being a member of the same unlawful association contrary to section 56(1) of the Code.
The offence of holding an office in an unlawful association (provided in subsection 2) is a felony punish able with imprisonment for 7 years. The offence of being a member of an unlawful association (provided in subsection 1) is punishable with imprisonment for three years.
On the 11th August, 1970, the case came before a District Judge, who was to hold the preliminary inquiry. At the. opening of the case, counsel for the appellant submitted that as his client was charged with an offence punishable with imprisonment not exceeding three years, he was triable summarily; and, therefore, no preliminary inquiry could be held in his case. The prosecuting officer submitted that the two accused were rightly charged together as they had committed practically the same offence, the one being an officer and the other being a member of the same unlawful association. He added that evidence would be adduced that both accused were meeting and discussing the problems of the unlawful association. Therefore, - the prosecution submitted - the two accused were rightly joined in the same charge under section 39 of the Criminal Procedure Law,Cap.155, [*937] and a preliminary inquiry should be held in the case of both accused. The Judge, accepting the submission, overruled the objection and proceeded with the taking of evidence in the preliminary inquiry. Against that ruling the appellant before us took the present appeal.
The first question which arises is whether such an appeal lies. Counsel on behalf of the appellant submitted that the appeal lies under section 25( 2) of the Courts of Justice law, 1960 (No. 14 of 1960) which reads:-
"25(2) Subject to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law but save as otherwise in this subsection provided every
decision of a Court exercising criminal jurisdiction shall be subject to appeal to the High Court".
"Any such appeal may be made as of right against conviction or sentence on any ground".
The submission on behalf of the appellant is that the decision to hold a preliminary inquiry is a "decision" of a Court exercising criminal jurisdiction and, therefore, it is subject to an appeal to the Supreme Court.
We find ourselves unable to accept this submission. The section provides that an appeal lies under subsection (2) ”subject to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law”, save as "otherwise provided" in the subsection. The provisions in the Criminal Procedure Law, Cap. 155, governing appeals in criminal cases, are contained in Part V of the statute, section 131 to 133 inclusive. The opening section 131(1) reads:- [*938]
" 131(1). Subject to the provisions of any other enactment in force for the time being, no appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Court exercising criminal jurisdiction except as provided for by this Law".
It is clear, we think, that when subsection (2) of section 25 of the Courts of Justice law, refers to "every
decision", this must be read "subject to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law;" and, therefore, it can only refer to "decisions" which are subject to an appeal under the Criminal Procedure law. The ruling against which the present appeal is taken, is not, as far as we can see on the basis of the argument that we have heard, such a
decision.
Therefore, we hold that this appeal does not lie. What other legal remedies may be available to the appellant, is a matter which is not for us to decide; it is a matter for his legal adviser to consider.
Appeal dismissed.