083-NLR-NLR-V-57-K.-MUTHUAH-Appellant-and-K.-A.-L.-PERRERA-Police-Sergeant-Respondent.pdf
1955Present : Fernando, J.'3v. MUTHTAH, Appellant, and K. A. I». PERERA (Polico Sergeant),
Respondent
S. C. 1,151—M. C. Nuicara EUtja, 11,451
Driving when drunk—First or second offence—Suspension of offender's drivinglicence—Motor Trafjic Act A"o. 14 of 10-51, ss. 1-38, 153, 218.
Vndcr section 13S of the Motor Traffic Act a first offender's driving licencemay be suspended for a period not normally exceeding six months for driving■ n motor vehiclo when drunk, nn offence punishablo under section 2IS.
A-PPEAL from a judgment of the Magistrate’s Court, Nuwara Eliya.
J.C. Thurairalnam, for the accused appellant.
Shiva Pasujiad, Crown Counsel, for the Attorney-General.
Cur. adv. vult.
December 13, 19oo. Fickxan do, J.—
The accused in this case was convicted on his own plea of drivinga motor vehicle under the influence of liquor, an offence punishableunder section 21S of the Motor Traffic Act No. 1-1 of 1951. He wassentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25 and his driving licence was suspendedfor a period of IS months.
Counsel for the appellant lias referred me to a judgment of my brotherSwan in an unreported case Caithan v. Sheriffdeen (Application in Revision3S9 ; M. C. Xegombo 2103; S. C. Minutes 26.1.53). In that caseCrown Counsel had conceded that the order suspending the licence fora similar offence had been made without jurisdiction, apparently for thereason that it was a first offenco ; ami the order of suspension was sotaside apparently in view of that concession.
Sub-section (2) of section 13S of the Act provides that where a drivinglicence of a person convicted of contravening section 153 contains at tlietimo of the conviction not less than two and not more than four previousconvictions for the same offence, the Court shall cither cancel the licenceor suspend the liconce for a period between six months and two years.The view taken by Crown Counsel in the case to which I have referredwas apparently that in the case of a breach of section 153, the only powerof suspension is that conferred by section 138 (2). But sub-section (1)of the same sectionprovides that in the ease of any offence under the Actthe Court may suspend the licence for a period not exceeding two years.Sub-section (1) has to be read “subject to the provisions of sub-section
”, but in my opinion the effect of the sections read together is thatwhereas in the case of a first or second offence tho power of suspension
is discretionary, a suspension or cancellation is compulsory under sub-Bcction (2) in the case of a third or subsequent offence. Sub-section (2)docs not”in my opinion qualify the discretion to suspend in the case ofa first or second offence.
It should bo noted that the Legislature deals with the case of a thirdofFcnco by insisting on a suspension for at least six months and I thinkthat tho intention thus expressed should be a fair guide as to the appro-priate period of suspension in the case of a first offence, and that accord-ingly, unless there arc special circumstances of aggravation, the periodofWspension, if any, ordered for a first offender should not normallyoXcced six months. 1 would therefore affirm tho conviction but orderthat tho period of suspension of the appellant’s licence bo reduced toone of six months commencing from 1st September, 1955.
Sentence reduced.