048-NLR-NLR-V-49-GNANAIAH-Price-Control-Inspector-and-KANDIAH-Respondent..pdf
HOWARD C.J.—Qnanaiah v. Kandiah.
15?
1948Present: Howard C.J. and Soertsz S.P.J.GNAJSTAIAH (Price Control Inspector) and KANDIAH, Respondent.
S. C. 1177—M. G. Vavuniya 21,232
Defence Regulations—Sale of potatoes—Excess of price—Accuracy of balance—No proof—Control of Prices (Supplementary Provisions) Regulations,Section 2 (2).
The accused was charged with selling a pound of potatoes at a price in excessof the retail price. The weight of the potatoes was found to be one poundwhether weighed with the accused’s scales or with the standard weights broughtby the Price Control Inspector from the Kachcheri.
Held, that there was evidence with regard to the accuracy of the scales andin the absence of evidence indicating their inaccuracy the accused shouldhave been convicted.
Sub-Inspector of Police, Kandy v. Wassira (1945) 46 N. L. R. 93 distinguished.
-A.PPEAL against an acquittal from the Magistrate’s Court, Vavuniya.
Alan Rose, K.C., Attorney-General, with A. C. Alles, Crown Counsel,for the appellant.
W. Thambiah, with S. Sharvananda, for the accused respondent.
Cur. adv. vult.
February 27, 1948. Howard C.J.—
This is an appeal by the complainant, the Food and Price ControlInspector, Vavuniya, with the sanction of the Attorney General, againstan order of the Magistrate dismissing the charge against the respon-dent of selling to one C. Rajanathan one pound of potatoes for 50 cents, aprice in excess of the retail price of 28£ cents in contravention of section2 (2) of the Control of Prices (Supplementary Provisions) Regulations.The facts in the case were not disputed. The only point taken by therespondent at the trial and in this Court was that there was no proofof the-balance in which the pound of potatoes were weighed beingaccurate. The Magistrate relying on the decision in Sub-Inspector ofPolice, Kandy v. Wassira1 found the respondent not guilty. That case,also an appeal by the Attorney-General from an order of acquittal by
1 (1945) 46 N. L. R. 93.
16-N.L.R. Vol-xlix
154
Colonne v. Senaratne.
-the Magistrate, was heard by me. The concluding portion of my judgmentwas as follows :—
“ With regard to the weighing of the bread on the scales of therespondent, criminal cases of this nature must be established beyondall reasonable doubt. With no evidence as to the accuracy of thescales it cannot be said that this standard of proof has been reached.I think the Magistrate’s decision on this point was correct.”
The earlier part of my judgment upheld the Magistrate’s decision inthis case on another point. I am of opinion that the present case isdistinguishable inasmuch as in Sub-Inspector of Police, Kandy v. Wassira,there was no evidence at all of the accuracy of the weights and scales.In the present case the wieght of the potatoes was found to b– one poundwhether weighed with the respondent’s weights or with the standardweights brought by the Price Control Inspector from the Kachcheri.In the unreported case Food and Price Control Inspector, Colombo v.William Singho1 decided by me on August 19, 1947, I distinguished thefacts of that case from those in the Kandy case on the ground that therewas evidence in the latter case with regard to the accuracy of the weightsand scales. I think the present case can be distinguhished in the sameway. The weights of the respondent and the standard weight indi-cated that the potatoes sold weighed a pound. In these circumstances Iconsider that the Magistrate, in the absence of any evidence indicatingthe inaccuracy of the weights or scales, should have convicted therespondent.
For the reasons I have given the , ppeal must be allowed and theOrder of acquittal is set aside. The case is remitted to the Magistrate toconvict the accused and pass sentence.
Soertsz S.P.J.—I agree.
Appeal allowed.