JUDGMENT
The two appellants were originally jointly charged with murder contrary to section 204 of the Penal Code. However, on December 5, 1983, the information for the joint charge of murder was amended by substituting the offence of manslaughter contrary to section 202 as read with section 205 of the Penal Code, in place of the offence of murder. According to the record of the proceedings before the High Court, (Bhandari J) the first appellant (King Katana) replied to the charge and said:
“We killed him, but that was not intentional.”
The original record of the proceedings does not show that the other appellant replied to the charge in his own words. Yet the trial judge entered a plea of guilty to a charge of manslaughter in respect of both appellants. The appeal of each is against sentence. Each disputes the age assessment of “well over and above 20 years” made by a Radiologist. The facts as narrated by the learned State Counsel included the rather important assertion that the appella…