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

IN RE VELIN et al.


In Re Velin Et Al.

1951 Present: Gratiaen J.

IN RE VELIN
et al.

 In revision under Section 356 of Criminal Procedure. Code

M. C. Matugama, 11,984; M. C. Balangoda, 24,590; M. C. Avissawella, 53,121; M. C. Kalutara, 10,325; M. C. Gampaha, 179; M. C. Colombo, 6,203; M. M. C. Colombo, 81,462.

Sentence-Payment of Fines (Courts of Summary Jurisdiction) Ordinance, No. 49 of 1938-Purposes for which it was designed-Sentence of fine in first instance- Duties of sentencing Court-Sections 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8-Criminal Procedure Code, s. 312 (4) (c).

Where an offender is sentenced only to pay a fine, a Court of summary jurisdiction must comply with the following imperative provisions of the Payment of fines (Courts of Summary Jurisdiction) Ordinance, No. 49 of 1938: -

(a) The means of the offender must, among other considerations, be taken into account in fixing the amount of the fine (Section 2).

(b) Unless special circumstances (the nature of which must be recorded in the proceedings) are proved or admitted to exist, at least seven days time must be given for the payment of the fine the grant of further extensions of time is permissible (Section 3); an order, therefore






















































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