Section 16(4): special verdict of guilty but insane on appeal
Although a trial judge is under a duty to direct a jury on the law as to insanity even when a plea of insanity is not specifically raised, the obligation so to direct on insanity only arises where there is some evidence either led by the prosecution or the defence, or both, which in law may amount to insanity; in such a case, even if the trial court failed to direct or misdirected the jury upon it, this court will exercise the powers given it by section 16 (4) of the Courts Act, 1960,1 to quash the sentence passed, and to substitute the special verdict of guilty but insane, and make the consequential order.
Section 8(1)(c): appeals from decisions in other matters
Again the provision in section 60 (1) of the Act that the judge may exercise that jurisdiction “either without hearing argument or after hearing argument” must be interpreted to mean that in the exercise of jurisdiction under the said section the judge constitutes a court, i.e. the High Court of which he is a judge. Therefore in exercising his powers under the said section 60, the judge exercises the jurisdiction conferred upon the High Court by section 29 (d) of the Courts Act, 1960, consequently it is under section 8 (1) (c) that an appeal from a decision or order he makes under the said section 60 will lie to this court.
