Welcome to the new SeyLII website. Enjoy an improved search engine and new collections. If you are used to accessing SeyLII via Google, note Google will take some time to re-index the site.

We are still busy migrating some of the old content. If you need anything in particular from the old website, it will be available for a while longer at https://old.seylii.org/

Court name
Supreme Court
Case number
CO 63 of 2018
Counsel for plantiff
Mr Khalyaan Karunakaran

The Republic v Lailam (CO 63 of 2018) [2018] SCSC 1015 (04 November 2018);

Media neutral citation
[2018] SCSC 1015
Counsel for defendant
Mr Joel Camille
Burhan, J


Criminal Side: CO 63/2018


       [2018] SCSC 1015














Heard:                         5 November 2018

Counsel:                      Mr. Khalyaan,  for the Republic


                                    Mr. Camille for accused



Delivered:                   5 November 2018




[1]        I have considered the application to remand the accused and the submissions made by learned Counsel in respect of bail. The charge of manslaughter attracts the term of life imprisonment.  This in itself shows the seriousness of the offence with which the accused has been charged with. 


[2]        Learned Counsel drew the attention of the Court to the Jean Raguain case where the accused in that instant case was also charged with manslaughter and was also under the influence of alcohol, but the Court released him on bail.  In that instant case the learned prosecution Counsel did not move to remand the accused and further the accused did not attempt to abscond from the scene of the accident.  In this instant case, in addition to the seriousness of the charge, the accused had fled the scene of the accident and had to be apprehended elsewhere.  This in itself shows substantial grounds that the accused might abscond from appearance in the case and also obstruct the course of justice. Fleeing the scene of the incident certainly does not show he was intending to face the consequences of justice. Therefore this Court is satisfied that substantial grounds exist to remand the accused.  Learned Counsel for the prosecution has also referred to Court that in his safety it is best he be remanded, this is also taken into consideration by Court. 


[3]        For all the aforementioned conditions I proceed to remand the accused into custody.  The accused is remanded for a period of two weeks, and he is to be brought to Court on the 19th of November 2018 at 9 a.m.



Signed, dated and delivered at Ile du Port on 5 November 2018


M Burhan

Judge of the Supreme Court