H. N. G. FERNANDO, J.—Mahafoor v. Ounasekera
1957Present: H. N. 6. Fernando, J.A. L. M. MAHAFOOR, Appellant, and S. DE Z. GUNASEKERA(Public Health Inspector), Respondent
S. C.149—M. C. Avissawella, 23,831
Butchers Ordinance (Cap. 201)—Section 4—Unlawful exposure of meat for sale-ingredients of offence.
In a prosecution for unlawful exposure of meat for sale in breach of section4 of the Butchers Ordinance, as amended by Ordinance 44 of 1947 and Acts 2of 1951 and 48 of 1953, there must be evidence that the meat in question wasthe meat of an animal slaughtered in Ceylon.
/APPEAL from a judgment of the Magistrate’s Court, Avissawella.
S. B. Lekamge, for the accused-appellant.
Walter Wimalaohandra, with 0. E. de Silva, for the complainant-respondent.
Cur. ado. vuM.
May 29,1957. H. N. G. Fernando, J.—
Counsel for the appellant has raised a point which might be said to be“ technical ”, but which must nevertheless succeed. The accused wascharged with having carried on in July 1956 the trade of a Butcherwithout a licence in breach of section 4 of the Butchers Ordinance(Cap. 201) as amended by Ordinance 44 of 1947 and Acts 2 of 1951 and48 of 1953. The evidence for the prosecution established that the accusedon certain dates in July 1956 did in fact sell meat and that he was notthe holder of a Butcher’s Licence issued under the Ordinance. “ Butcher ”by definition is a person who either slaughters animals or exposes forsale the meat of animals slaughtered in the Island. “Animals” bydefinition include cattle, goats, sheep, pigs and turtles. One pointwhich might be of use to the defence is that the evidence did not disclosethat the meat exposed for sale by the accused was the meat of some animalincluded in the definition of animal, but the argument stressed by Counselhas been that there is no evidence whatever to show that the meat inquestion is the meat of an animal slaughtered in Ceylon. I would holdthat an essential ingredient of the offence which is the subject of thepresent charge is the exposure of the meat of an animal which has beenslaughtered in the Island and that the absence of evidence to establish theingredient vitiates the conviction. The accused has therefore to beacquitted.
A. L. M. MAHAFOOR, Appellant, and S. DE Z. GUNASEKERA (Publice Health Inspecto