KING v. CARUPIAH et al
1914 Present: Pereira J.
THE KING v. CARUPIAH et al.
86-96-D. C. (Crim. ) Ratnapura, 1, 074.
Unlawful assembly-Common object-" Other offence "-Causing hurt- Penal Code, s. 138.
The expression " other offence " in section 188, sub-section (3), of the Ceylon Penal Code means an offence ejusdem generis with those expressly mentioned in the sub-section; and therefore, when the common object of an assembly was to commit an offence other than one in the nature of mischief or criminal trespass, the assembly could not be said to be an " unlawful assembly, " unless, of course, it would be such an assembly under the other sub-sections of section 188.
THE facts are set out in the judgment.
A. St. V. Jayewardene, for appellants. -The offence of " causing hurt " cannot constitute the common object of the members of an unlawful assembly. The offence must be one ejusdem generis with those mentioned previously, viz., mischief and criminal trespass. " Causing hurt " does not come under the category. (See Muniweera v. Danta.[6 Tam. 78.]
Cooray, C. C., for respondent. -" Offence " is defined as anything made punishable under the Penal Code (see section 38
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.