068-NLR-NLR-V-23-GOONERATNA-v.-SILVA.pdf
( 264 )
1222.
Present: Bertram C.J.
GOONERATNA v. SILVA.
26—P. C. Eatnapura, 19>691.
Police Ordinance, s.—Discharge of fireworks—Not necessary to prove
that peace of inhabitants was disturbed.
The prohibition against the discharge of fireworks or crackers insection 90 of the Police Ordinance, 1865, is absolute. It is notnecessary to show that the peace of the inhabitants was likely to bedisturbed, or that any horses were likely to be frightened.
JansZy C.C.} for the Crown, appellant.
January 31,1922. Bertram C.J.—
In this case the Magistrate has clearly fallen into an error. Theprohibition against the discharge of fireworks or crackers in section90 of the Police Ordinance, 1865, is absolute. It is not necessaryto show that the peace of the inhabitants was likely to be disturbed,or that any horses were likely to be frightened. The section has beenrecently expounded in a judgment of my brother Schneider, to whichI will refer the Magistrate (Inspector of Police v. de Soysa1). Ofcourse, it is open to the Magistrate, if he thinks that the prosecutionin the circumstances of the case is vexatious, to inflict a small oreven a nominal fine. Still, something should be done, either in theway of a fine or a warning, to bring it home to members of thepublicthat firework displays cannot be given without a police license.The case must go back, for trial.
Sent back.
1 {1916) 3C.W.R. in.