1930  Present: Lyall Grant J.

DE BRUIN v. DHARMABANDU.

425-P. C. Panadure, 1,479.

Obscene literature-Publication of book-Test of obscenity-Penal Code, s. 285.

In a charge of publishing an obscene book, it is not necessary to show that the obscenity lies in any particular words used.

It is sufficient if the scenes depicted and the details in which the scenes of passion are represented are, in fact, obscene.

APPEAL from an acquittal by the Police .Magistrate of Panadure.

J. E. M. Obeyesekere, C.C., for appellant.

F. de Zoysa, K.C. (with him D. E. Wijewardene), for accused, respondent.

August 25, 1930. LYALL GRANT J.-

This is an appeal from an acquittal, by the complainant, a Police Inspector, with the sanction of the Solicitor-General. The three accused were charged with having

printed for sale an obscene book, entitled " Rathi Sapatha ". The first accused was the writer or editor of the book ; the second accused was the owner of the press at which it was printed; and the third accused was the publisher of the book.

The book is written in Sinhalese and extracts have been made from it which have been interpreted into English by Mr. Punchihewa, the Sinhalese Press Examiner in the Criminal Investigation Department. The book appears to be a collection of tales or stories, and different Sinhalese experts have in the course of the evidence given conflicting opinions on the question of its obscenity.

The original complainant, Mr. Kuruppu, the assistant editor of the " Catholic Messenger ", Kandana, sent the book to the police complaining that he found some passages which were most revolting. He bought it at a book shop in Maradana.

Mr. Punchihewa was subjected to cross examination on the subject of various classical works but he would not admit that there were passages worse than or so bad as those he complained of in the accused's publication. He admitted, however, that Mr. W. F. Gunawardena, Mudaliyar, was one of the recognized scholars in Sinhalese. Mr. Gunawardena gave evidence for the defence, and in regard to the book in question he says': " It is a work of classical merit ; it is a work of high art ; it is very elegant in expression ; most of the thoughts there are couched in elegant and exalted language ; it is a book intended for cultured people ; it cannot be understood by the ordinary masses ". In regard to the translation, he said : " The translation does not bring out the spirit of the passages ; rendering into English in this translation is not only wanting in the spirit, dignity, and loftiness of the language of the original, but in the translation undue prominence is given to facts which should have been handled with delicacy ; the language used in the translation is very coarse compared with the neat and elegant language of the original. I am of opinion that this book would not corrupt the morals of those people who are cultured enough to understand it ; as regards the uneducated, it would have no effect on their morals as they could not understand the language ", and later, " I do not consider this book as obscence ".

On this state of the evidence, after the Magistrate had heard the arguments, he decided to call the Hon. Mr. D. B. Jayatilaka, Member of the Legislative Council, who was Chief Editor of the Sinhalese Dictionary, Manager of Buddhist Schools, President of the Young Men's Buddhist Association and a number of other Sabhas and Associations. Mr. Jayatilaka was asked to peruse the book and to give his opinion. He said in regard to the pages in question " There are no passages in these pages which could be definitely called obscene ; the general tendency of this pamphlet is not wholesome from a moral point of view ". He said " The book is written, not in the ordinary language of the ignorant people, it is written in literary style and hence may not be understood by ignorant people". But later on he said " It is not a work