Punchibanda v. Seelaw Athie – sllr 1986 volume 2 page 414

In the case between Punchibanda (the applicant seeking maintenance) and Seelawathie (the respondent), the court addressed the admissibility of police statements in maintenance proceedings and the procedural validity of an undated Magistrate’s order. It was held that the undated decision, when verified by contemporaneous journal entries, satisfied statutory requirements, and that statements to the police (P1 and P2) were admissible in the context of civil maintenance actions. The decision reaffirmed that criminal procedure limitations on police statements do not apply in maintenance proceedings under the Maintenance Ordinance, emphasizing that corroboration requirements can be satisfied by such evidence. Relying on established principles and statutory interpretation, it was determined that