( 234 )
Present: Pereira J.
PETER SINNO v. DORASAMY et aL
319-326—P. C. Avissawella, 16,305.
Village Communities Ordinance, No. 24 of 1889—Natives—IndianTamils—Jurisdiction of Village Tribunal.
Indian Tamils resident in Ceylon, though they may not be domi-ciled, are natives within the meaning of' section 28 of the VillageCommunities Ordinance.&
HE accused were convicted on a charge of unlawful gaming.They appealed.
Baum, K.C., for accused, appellants.—The Gansabhawa hasexclusive jurisdiction in a case of gambling (Jansz v. Perera 1. TheMagistrate is wrong in holding that the Village Tribunal has nojurisdiction to try five accused who were Indian Tamils. IndianTamils are “ natives " within the meaning of section 28 of theVillage Communities Ordinance (No. 24 of 1889). Section 3 of theOrdinance defines natives as those resident in the country otherthan Europeans and Burghers.
Cooray, Acting C.C., for the respondent.
Gut. adv. vult.
June 9, 1914. Pereira J.—
In this case objection has ^een taken to .the right of the Magistrateto tiy theaccused, on thevground thatthecase was within the
jurisdictionof the Gansabhawa,and thecaseof Jansz v. Perera 1
has been cited. It appears that some such objection was takenbefore theMagistrate himself,becausetheMagistrate notes as
follows“ The objection wastaken tomytrying the fifth and
seventh accused along with the other accused. First, second, third,fourth, and sixth accused are all Indian Tamils, and are not triablein the Village Tribunal. The offence itself was committed onMahaoya estate, near to .the Sanitary Board of Dehiowita. ” I donot know on what authority the Magistrate says that Indian Tamilsare not triable by the Gansabhawa. Crown Counsel who appearedfor the respondent was certainly not able to cite any. TheVillage Communities Ordinance, 1889, applies to all natives, andw natives ” has been defined in it to mean all persons resident (notdomiciled, it must be remembered) in the country other than personscommonly known as Europeans or as Burghers. . Indian Tamils are
* 9 N.L- B. 74
( 285 )
not commonly known as Europeans or Burghers, and I fail to seewhy the Ordinance should not be deemed to apply to them. Then,while stating that the offence was committed on Mahaoya estate,bear the Sanitary Board of Dehiowita, the Magistrate does notdefinitely hold that the offence was committed (if such wasthe case) outside the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of theGansabhawa.
I remit the case to the Magistrate for a fuller and more precisestatement of his reasons for not making order under section 84 ofthe Ordinance.
Peter Simnon. Dorafomy
PETER SINNO v. DORASAMY et al