VERDICT OF GUILTY

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 183, 7 August 1935, Page 11

VERDICT OF GUILTY

INDIAN CASE CONCLUDES ACCUSED DENIES CHARGE REMANDED FOR SENTENCE After a short retirement a verdict of guilty was returned by a jury in the Supreme. Court at Wanganui yesterday against an Indian, Bachint, who was charged with attempted indecent act against, a married woman. He was remanded until Friday morning for sentence. His Honour, the Chief Justice (Sir .Michael Myers) presided. The Crown’s < asc was conducted by the Crown Prosecutor (Air. N. R. Bain) and the ac-<-u. co a.s represented by Mr. V. B. Willis. Evidence was given yesterday by Funian Singh, the Indian who had sent for the police on the day of the happening, ami by Detective C. L. PacKnian, who had handled the police enquiries and had obtained a statement from the accused. In such statement accused stated that he was married and came to New Zealand in 1918, having at one time been employed in the police at Fiji. He admitted going to tnc camp of Rampi Singh and look a book and some clothes. He also asked Rampi’s husband for some money that was owing to him. The other Indians took to him and punched him. He denied entering the tent or assaulting Rampi Singn. He also stated that he went to the camp to get Indian funds to send to India for earthquake relief purposes. Denial of Charges. Accused, in evidence, ■ denied the charge. He said that for some years before 1933 he was moving backwards and forwards between India, Fiji, and New Zealand. He had known Rampi Singh since about last Christmas and knew her very well, and he had known her husband since 1918 and had been good friends. On the day of the Indian match in Wanganui witness drew £8 10s. He met Rampi and her husband and the latter asked him for money and he gave him £2, which had not been, repaid. The husband also asked witness to buy some clothing for himself and wife aud he would pay the nibney later. These goods were bought for Rampi. Witness also paid the bus fare back to Fordell that evening for Rampi and her husband. At the shop at Fordell he bought further clothing for Rampi and child. Witness detailed various visits he had made to the camp of complainants. Cross-examined by Mr. Bain accused said that he had gone to the camp on the day in question to return a book and give tne woman complainant clothes. She had directed him to : where the men were working and he had gone there. H<» had asked Naud Singh for the money he owed witness and Nand had kicked up a row and had threatened to give witness a hiding. They had all walked back to the camp. They. cont ; nued to argue about the money. Mr. Bain: AV ho did?

Witness: They were all getting wild at me and then 1 went away. Nand Singh did not accuse witness of assaulting his wife, witness stated further. Accused did not at any time ask Nand Stingh to let him go and he would not come back again. Nobody had attacked accused at .the camp, it was just argument and talk. When he went away he had no idea anybody was following him. His Honour questioned accused, regarding the statement he made to the police which he said was true except for one mistake. His Honour: Then how do you account for the fact that you say in this statement that the Indians punched you, and yet to-day you say that there was only words and arguments. Witness replied that he should have said “they bumped him a bit.” He had meant to say that. Two workmates of the accused, Thumon Singh and Lahar Singh, gave evidence, stating that the accused’s purpose in visiting Nand Singh’s camp was to obtain money that Nand Singh owed accused. After a short retirement the jury found accused guilty.