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

RATNAYAKE v. DE SILVA
NLR42V520



Ratnayake V. De Silva

 

1941     Present: Wijeyewardene J.

 

RATNAYAKE v. DE SILVA.

 

401- M. M. C. Galle, 28,784.

 

Shops-Keeping it open after hours-Serving of customers-Essential ingre­dient of offence-Shops Regulation Ordinance, No. 66 of 1938, s. 18.

It is an essential ingredient of an offence created by section 18 of the Shops Regulation Ordinance and by paragraph ? of the closing order published in Government Gazette No. 8,642 that the shop must be kept open for the serving of customers. It is not an offence under the section to permit a customer to enter a shop before the hour fixed for the opening of the shop.

 

APPEAL from a conviction by the Municipal Magistrate of Galle.

 

E. B. Wickremanayake (with him Rajendram), for accused, appellant. H. W. R. Weerasuriya, C.C., for complainant, respondent.

 

Cur. adv. vult

 

July 25, 1941. WIJEYEWARDENE J.-

 

This is a case under the Shops Regulation Ordinance, No. 66 of 1938. The charge against the accused reads as follows : -

 

On Monday the 16th day of November, 1940,----you, being occupier of a shop ----- Other than a shop to which the

 


 

provisions of paragraphs 3, 5 and 6 of a closing Order published in the Government Gazette No. 8,642 of July 26, 1940, ---- in contravention of the provisions of paragraph 2 of the said order, did-

 

(a) in a case to which the provisions of section 29 (2) of the Ordinance and of paragraph 4 of the said Order do not apply, keep the said shop open at 7.45 A.M. and did thereby commit an offence punishable under section 23 (1) read with section 18 of the Ordinance.

 

(b) in a case to which the provisions of paragraph 4 of the said Order do not apply, permit a customer to enter the said shop before 9 A.M. on ------- and did thereby commit an offence punishable under section 23 (1) read with section 18 of the Ordinance.

 

The Magistrate convicted the accused and in the course of his order stated-" The second count takes up the first count. I discharge the accused with a warning on the first count and sentence him to pay a fine of Rs. 10 on the second count".

 

The accused has appealed against that conviction and sentence and has also filed papers in revision.

 

The closing order referred to in the charge is an Order made under section 15 of the Ordinance. Paragraph 2 of the Order provides inter alia that shops other than those mentioned in paragraph 3 " shall be closed for the serving of customers " on Mondays except between the hours of 9 A.M. and 6 P.M. Paragraph 4 provides for the relaxation of the provi­sions of paragraph 2 during certain periods preceeding the Christmas day, &c., and paragraph 5 empowers

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 Back to top