Compelling attendance when direct indictment filed
174 Compelling attendance when direct indictment filed
On the filing in court of a direct indictment against an accused, the DPP may apply to the court for the issue of a summons or a warrant to arrest in order to compel the attendance of the accused.
On an application under subsection (1), the court, if satisfied that the charge discloses an offence known to law, must issue—
a summons requiring the accused to attend at the court on a specified date and at a specified time to answer to the indictment; or
subject to subsection (3), a warrant to arrest.
S. 174(3) amended by No. 6/2018 s. 68(Sch. 2 item 38.1).
The court must not issue in the first instance a warrant to arrest unless satisfied by sworn or affirmed evidence, whether oral or by affidavit, that—
it is probable that the accused will not answer a summons; or
the accused has absconded, is likely to abscond or is avoiding service of a summons that has been issued; or
a warrant is required or authorised by any other Act or for other good cause.
If the accused fails to attend before the court on the date and at the time specified in the summons, the court, on the application of the DPP, may issue a warrant to arrest the accused.
Note to s. 174 amended by No. 68/2009 s. 51(zh).
Note
Section 411 provides that an arrested person must, if practicable, be brought before the court which issued the warrant.
This Act’s bill:Explanatory memorandumSecond reading speech
The statute text is free to read above. View subscription options to unlock the case-law research tools for each provision.