RODE    v.    BAWA.

P. C, Badulla, 16,009.

Administration of justice by Magistrates-Inexpediency of a Superintendent of Police trying, as Police Magistrate, complaints of street nuisances and resistance to the Police.

The Superintendent of Police for the Province of Uva had been appointed Additional Police Magistrate of the Police Court of Badulla. There having been complaints of street nuisances in the town of Badulla, the Superintendent gave orders that all offenders should be arrested and prosecuted. Acting upon these orders a police officer arrested appellant, without a warrant, for committing a nuisance in his view; and as appellant resisted the arrest, he charged him with not only committing a nuisance, but obstructing him in the execution of his duty. Appellant was brought before the Superintendent sitting as Additional Police Magistrate, tried by him. and convicted on both charges.

Held by BONSER, C. J., that the conviction could not stand. The principle applicable to a case like this is that the administration of justice by Magistrates should be clear from all suspicion of unfairness. That justice should be believed by the public to be unbiassed is almost as important as that it should be in fact unbiassed.

Per Lawrie, J.-An officer of the police cannot take part either as Judge or investigating Magistrate in cases in which members of the police are personally interested, the disqualification being not that the Magistrate has a direct interest, but that the parties before him are those over whom he has control, and in the maintenance of 'whose position and authority he is interested.

Lawrie, J., would however sustain the conviction for committing nuisance, the Magistrate having had no interest in the prosecution for that offence either of a personal or pecuniary nature, and no bias either against or in favour of the accused.

THE facts of the case appear sufficiently in the judgment of BONSER, C.J.

Bawa, for appellant. The Police Magistrate belonged to the same class as the prosecutor-the police. There would be a reasonable apprehension of bias-actual bias was not suggested.

In Regina v. Huggins, 1895, 1 Q. B, 565, the conviction was quashed  where only one of a bench of six justices was held disqualified. Further, the Magistrate, as Superintendent of Police, had specially directed prosecution in such cases. The case, Christoff'elsz v. Sterna Lebbe, 1 C. L. R. 5, was in point.

Cooke, C. C, for respondent.

Cur. adv. vult.

19th May,