SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

GUNAWARDENE v. PUNCHIRALA et al.


Gunawardene V. Punchirala Et Al.,

Present : De Sampayo J.   1921.

GUNAWARDENE v. PUNCHIRALA et al.

P. C. Kurunegala, 11,602.

Whipping-Theft of a bull-Jurisdiction of Police Court-Ordinance No. 4 of 1891.

A Police Court has no jurisdiction, except where the offender is a person under sixteen years of age, to inflict whipping or lashes for theft of a bull under section 368 of the Penal Code.

THE facts appear from the judgment.

M. W. H. de Silva, C.C., in support.

June 15, 1921. DE SAMPAYO J.-

In this case the accused was convicted of the offence of theft of a bull under section 368 of the Penal Code. The Magistrate sentenced him to six months' rigorous imprisonment and to receive twenty strokes with a rattan. The Penal Code does provide for whipping in the case of offences under section 368. The Police Court jurisdiction to inflict lashes is, however, limited. Under section 15 of the Criminal Procedure Code the Police Court is authorized to inflict whipping if the offender is under sixteen years of age. That provision does not apply in this case, because the accused person is not under that age, but is an adult. The only other provision authorizing the Poli

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top