006-NLR-NLR-V-65-N.-M.-BANDA-Petitioner-and-K.-S.-S.-PERERA-Respondent.pdf
20
Bcmda «> Ptmra
i
Present: H. N. G. Fernando, J.
N.M. BANDA, Petitioner, and, K. S. S. PERERA, Respondent3. C. 16 of 1.963—Application for Revision in M. C. Negombo, 13400
Motor Traffic Act—Section 136 (4)—Suspension of driving licence—Duty of Courtto call upon the accused for his explanation—Gravity of the offence of drivinga motor vehicle without an effective policy of insurance.
An order of suspension of a driving licence should not be made without firstgiving the accused an opportunity of giving his explanation.
If, because of special circumstanoes, an order of suspension of the drivinglicence is not made under section 136 (4) of the Motor Traffic Act when a personis convicted of driving a motor vehicle without an effective policy of insuranoe,a substantial fine should be imposed.
Application to revise an order of tire Magistrate's Court, Negombo.
Wijesekera, with D. 3. Wijesinghe, for accused-appellant.
R.I. Obeyesekere, Crown Counsel, for Attorney-General.
Andiris Appuhamy v. Kuruppu
21
March 6,1963. H. N. G. FEKmroo, J.—
The accused was charged in this case firstly with driving a motorvehiole without a revenue licence and secondly for driving the samevehicle without an effective policy of insurance in respect of its use.
—He-pleaded guilty and was fined Bs. 10 on the lBt count and warnedand discharged on the 2nd count. In addition, the learned Magistratemade order suspending the driving licence for a period of three months.
Counsel for the accused relies on Harrison v. Ahamath1 and submitsthat the order of suspension of the driving licence should not have beenmade without first giving the accused an opportunity of giving hisexplanation.
I agree with the decision cited and would, therefore, set aside pro formathe order of suspension and remit the case to the Magistrate in order thathe may hear the accused in regard to the matter of the suspension.
At the same time attention is drawn to sub-section (4) of section 136of the Motor Traffic Act which requires a suspension order for at least12 months to he made unless for special reasons to he recorded theCourt decides either not to make the order or to reduce the period ofsuspension. Sub-section (4) indicates the gravity of the offence ofdriving a motor vehicle the use of which is not covered by insurance,and it Beems to me that, if because of special circumstances an order ofsuspension is not made, an offence of this type should be punished witha substantial fine within the limits permitted by the Act.
Case remitted for consideration of sentence.