APPUHAMY v. EMANIS et al
NLR23V160
Present : Schneider A.J.
APPUHAMY v. EMANIS et al.
638-639-M.C. Colombo, 3,382.
Ordinance No. 21 of 1919, s.
9-Living on the earnings of prostitution- Presumption-Single act.
To sustain a conviction of knowingly living on the earnings of prostitution
under section 9(1) (a) of Ordinance No. 21 of 1919, proof that, on a single
occasion, accused brought a woman for prostitution was held not sufficient.
" There is no evidence which would justify the raising of the presumption
created by sub-section (2), because there is no evidence in this case that the
woman was a prostitute, nor is there any evidence to show that the accused lived
wholly or in part on the earnings of prostitution."
THE
facts appear from the judgment
De Jong, for the appellant.
July 8, 1921. SCHNEIDER A.J.-
The evidence which the learned Magistrate has accepted is that a Police
Constable saw the accused standing by a " passenger," who was in a rickshaw,
which was stopped by the gate of the Hunupitiya park; that the accused went
away, and within a few minutes returned to the park with a woman, with whom the
" passenger " had sexual intercourse while the accused stood on a side. Upon
this evidence the Magistrate convicted the accused of knowingly living on the
earnings of prostitution, an offence punishable under section 9 (1) (a) of Part
1, of the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, No. 21 of 1919. The Magistrate
states in his judgment that, in view of the provisions of section 9 (2) of that
Ordinance, the accused must be deemed to be knowingly living on the earnings of
prostitution. There is no evidence which would justify the raising of the
presumption created by that sub-section, because there is no evidence in this
case that the woman was a prostitute, nor is there any evidence to show that the
accused lived wholly or in part on the earnings of prostitution. A single
isolated fact, such as is spoken to by the Police Constable, is not sufficient
to sustain a conviction under the provisions of the Ordinance under which the
accused has been convicted.
I would
therefore, set aside the conviction, and acquit the accused.
Accused acquitted.
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.