P. SUWANDA , Appellant, and INSPECTOR OF POLICE KAHAWATTA, Respondent

025-NLR-NLR-V-61-P.-SUWANDA-Appellant-and-INSPECTOR-OF-POLICE-KAHAWATTA-Respondent.pdf


Sutoanda v. Inspector of Police, Hahawatt-a
119
1957
Present:H. N. G. Fernando, J.P. SUWANDA, Appellant, and INSPECTOR OF POLICE,K ATT A WATT A, RespondentC. 477—M. C. Ratnapura, 59719
Crown costs—Failure to pay—Power of Court to impose a sentence of imprisonment—Criminal Procedure Code, ss. 312, 325.
The appellant was ordered to outer into a bond under section 325 of theCriminal Procedure Code as well as to pay Rs. 25 as Crown costs, and timewas given to pay the Crown costs.
'Held, that, on failure to pay the Crown costs, the Magistrate had no juris-diction to impose as a penalty a sentence of imprisonment.
1 {1954 56 N. L. B. 250.
2 {1919) 9 C. W. B. 64.
120 H. N. G. FERNANDO, J.—Suwanda v. Inspector of Police, Kahawatta
Appeal from an order of the Magistrate’s Court, Ratnapura.No appearance for the accused-appellant.
Shiva Pasupati, Crown Counsel, for the Attorney-General.
Our. adv. vult.
September 3, 1957. H. N. G. Eebnando, J.—
The appellant in this case was ordered to enter into a bond undersection 325 of the Criminal Procedure Code to be of good behaviour fora period of three years as well as to pay Rs. 25 as Crown costs, andtime was given till 10th April 1957 to pay the Crown costs. The Crowncosts not having been paid on that date, the Magistrate purported tovacate his previous order both for the bond and for the payment of Crowncosts and proceeded to pass a sentence of three months’ rigorous imprison-ment.
I doubt whether the failure to pay Crown costs as ordered can befollowed by the imposition of a term of imprisonment and also whetheran order for a recognizance under section 325 can be vacated and replacedby a sentence of imprisonment except in circumstances expressly set outin Chapter 26 of the Code. But in any event if the provisions of section312 of the Code are applicable where an order for Crown costs is madeupon the footing that such order is equivalent to a fine, section 312clearly contemplates that a default term must be imposed if at all at thesame time as the fine. Eor this reason, if for no other, the Magistratehad no jurisdiction to impose a sentence of imprisonment as a penalty forthe failure to pay the fine.
The appellant in his petition of appeal states that he is now preparedto pay the costs ordered. The sentence imposed on 10th April 1957is set aside and the orders made on 27th March 1957 are restored.
Sentence of imprisonment set aside.