CASUPATHIPILLAI v. SABAPATHIPILLAI

CASUPATHIPILLAI v. SABAPATHIPILLAI.

P. C., Baiticaloa, No. 11,089.

Vaccination-Ordinance No. 20 of 1886, ss. 6 and, 15-Omission to take child for vaccination-Section 289 of the Ceylon Penal Code- Breaches of duty under s. 6 of Ordinance No. 20 of 1886-Trial of several accused at the same time there for-Criminal Procedure Code, s. 207.

The omission on the part of a parent or guardian to take or cause to be taken a child for vaccination or re-vaccination as required by section 6 of Ordinance No. 20 of 1886, is not an offence punishable under section 1 5 of that Ordinance. It falls within the purview of section 280 of the Ceylon Penal Code.

It in irregular to charge and try more than one person in the same case for breaches of duty imposed by section 6 of Ordinance No. 20 of 1886.

THE facts of the case appear in the judgment.

Jayawardena, for appellant.

Cur. adv. vult.

19th August, 1896. Withers, J.-

Defendant its this case has been convicted of an offence under clauses 6* and 15 of Ordinance No. 20 of 1886, in that he, being the father of an unvaccinated child two years old, failed to produce the said child, for the purpose of being vaccinated, to the officer who attended to vaccinate at the complainant's house on the 12th of June last between 8 and 10 a.m., an offence, if one, punishable under section 15 of the said Ordinance with a maximum fine of Rs. 10.

__________________________________________________________________________

" Every child who has no marks of successful vaccination or of smallpox, or who, if he has such marks, resides in a, house or building in which there is a patient suffering from smallpox, shall be taken or caused, to be taken by his parent, or guardian to the place so appointed nearest, the residence of such child for the purpose of being vaccinated or re-vaccinated."

" Every adult who shall not cause himself to be vaccinated, and every parent or guardian who shall not cause the child under his care to be vaccinated {such adult or child not being certified to be in an unfit state for, or insusceptible of, vaccination), or who shall not on the day fixed by section 9 after the vaccination has been performed (in the case of the adult) present himself, or (in the case of the parent or guardian) take or cause to be taken the child for inspection according to the provisions in this Ordinance respectively contained, and every person who acts in contravention of, or fails to comply with the provisions of sections 7 and 8, or any regulations duly made under section 1(5, or who hinders or obstructs any one in the discharge of any duty imposed upon him by this Ordinance or by any regulation duly made under section 10, and every officer who wilfully signs any false certificate under this Ordinance, shall be guilty of an offence, and be liable to a fine not exceeding rupees ten."

It was argued in] the first place that this was an order appealable as of right, because if it came within section 405 of the Criminal Procedure Code there could never be an appeal at all under section 15 of the Vaccination Ordinance, and this could not have been intended. "But that it comes within the purview of section 405 of the Criminal Procedure Code is clear from the 400th section of the same Code.

A point of law was taken in the petition of appeal, that the notice referred to in the judgment was not proved so as to affect the defendant with the offence charged.

That point was not pressed upon me by counsel, and the record discloses that there was sufficient proof of notice to bind the defendant. The point pressed upon me in appeal was that the breach of a parent's duty to take or cause to be taken to the duly appointed place for vaccination a child who has no marks of -successful vaccination or of smallpox, imposed on him by the 6th section of the Vaccination Ordinance, is not an offence punishable, under the 15th section of that Ord

Click Here to Read the rest of this document