W. Comer Petheram, C.J.
1. We think that this rule must be made absolute to set aside the conviction.
2. The facts of the case are that a person went on one occasion and informed the Police that he had been robbed in the street of a shawl, but in the statement which he made to the Police he did not indicate any particular person or describe any person in such a way as by any possibility could be supposed to implicate any one as the person who committed the robbery. All he said was that he was robbed by a person whom he did not see, so that in the statement that he made he did not say anything to cast suspicion on any one in particular. Under these circumstances, there was no offence within the meaning of Section 182 of the Penal Code. That section provides that if any person gives any information to a public servant with the intention of inducing him to put his powers in force to the injury or annoyance of any person, or to do or omit anything which such public servant would not have done or omitted to do if the true state of facts respecting which such information was given had been known to him, shall be punished in a certain way there specified.
3. As it seems to us, that section must be read as a whole, and, taken as a whole, we think it applies to those cases in which the Police are induced, upon the information supplied to them to do or omit to do something which might affect some third person, and which they would not have done if they had known the true state of things.
4. Upon the information which was given to these Police constables, all that they could be justified in doing was to examine the informant as to what had happened to him, and then make such inquiries as the result of that examination might render desirable, but they would have no right to interfere with any one or search any one's house, because there were no circumstances brought to their knowledge by the information which this man gave, which entitled them to suppose that any particular individual was guilty of any offence. Under the circumstances, the most that the statement of the accused amounts to is, that it was untrue and was made for, the purpose of hoaxing the Police. No doubt that is a very wrong thing for any man to do. In the first place it is wrong to tell lies, and in the second place it is extremely wrong to take up the time of Government servants by putting them to useless inquiries under circum stances of this kind; but I do not think myself that such conduct comes within the meaning of this section, or amounts to anything more than a hoax, for which no punishment is provided by the Code. Under these circumstances, we cannot make a crime when it is not made one by the Code, or provide a punishment for it.
5. The rule will therefore be made absolute to set aside the conviction; the prisoner will be discharged.