080-NLR-NLR-V-46-J.-L.-RODRIGO-Petitioner-and-INSPECTOR-OF-POLICE-MIRIGAMA-Respondent.pdf
J. L. Rodrigo and Inspector of Police, Mirigamo.
289
1945Present: Wljeyewardene J.J.L. RODRIGO, Petitioner, and INSPECTOR OF POLICEMIRIGAMA, Respondent.
In revision—M. C. Gampaha, 24,444.
Firearms Ordinance (Cap. 139), s. 22 (2) (e)—Watcher convicted of using andpossessing a gun without a permit—Power of Court to confiscate gun.
Where the watcher of an estate is convicted of possessing and using agun, which belonged to the Owner, without a permit from the properauthority, the Court has no power to confiscate the gun. «
T
HIS was an application to revise an order of the Magistrate ofGampaha.
Mackenzie Pereira in support.
E. H. T. Chinaseltara, C.C., as amicus curiae.
Cur. adv. vult.
46/22
1 (1880) 3 S. C. Circular 12.
840 WXJ KYEWABDENE J.—J. L. Rodrigo and Inspector of Police, Mirigoma.
May 21, 1945. Wueyewabdene J.—
The respondent, a Police Sergeant, instituted proceedings under section148 (1) (b) of the Criminal Procedure Code charging one Brumpy, “ awatcher under one Mr. J. L. Rodrigo of Negombo,” for possessing andusing a gun without a permit from the proper authority in breach ofsection 22 (2) (e) of the Firearms Ordinance.
The charge also set out the fact that the accused was a watcher underJ. L. Rodrigo. On the accused pleading guilty the Magistrate convictedhim and fined him. The Magistrate, then, made an order confiscating'the gun and said in the course of his order: —
"I think great care should be used in giving guns to watchers..The accused had no permit to use the gun. The responsibility is theowner’s ”.
The above statement of facts shows that the Magistrate was aware atthe time of the order that the accused was not the owner of the gun.-The present application is made by J. L- Rodrigo, the owner of thegun, asking that the order of the Magistrate confiscating the gun be setaside. The section of the Firearms Ordinance under which such an ordercould be made is section 44 and that section enacts: —
“ Where any person is convicted of an offence under sections
.22of this Ordinance any gun in respect of which
the offence was committed shall, if the person convicted is the owner ofthe gun, be subject at the discretion of the Court to confiscation.”
The accused was not the owner of the gun, and, therefore, theMagistrate could not have confiscati'd the gun.
I set aside the order and direct the gun to be returned to the petitioner.
Set aside.