ROSE C.J.—Lanerolle r. Perera
1953Present: Rose C.J.
R.K. LANEROLLE, Appellant, and M. X. J. PERERA,Respondent
S.C. 1,140—.M. O. Nuwara Eliya, 7,287
Stolen property—Assisting in concealing or disposing of it—Penal Code, s. 396.
The mere assisting in obtaining the return of stolen property, even if it weredone with a view to protecting the original thief, does not fall within the ambitof section 396 of the Penal Code.
Jj-PPEAL from a judgment of the Magistrate’s Court, Nuwara Eliya.
M. M. Kumarakulas ingham, with Christie Fernando, for the 2ndaccused-appellant.
A. Mahendrarajah, Crown Counsel, for the Attorney-General.
October 1, 1953. ' Rose C.J.—
In this case the appellant was convicted of an offence contra section 396of the Penal Code. The position would appear to be, and learned CrownCounsel does not dispute, that the motive of the 2nd accused in thismatter was to obtain the return of the stolen blankets by the 1st accused,1 (1938) 39 N. L. R. 337.
SWAN J.—Andiya Vidane. v. Jansze.
who admittedly had stolen them, to their lawful owner, with a view>no doubt, to preventing, if possible, the 1st accused from being prosecuted-While there can be no doubt that the conduct of the appellant in thiscase was foolish and indiscreet, it seems to me that the matter is coveredby the principle that is explained in a case reported in 11 Criminal LawJournal of India at page. 493, where a section in identical terms withSection 396 was under consideration and where it was held that the mereassisting in obtaining the return of stolen property, even if it were donewith a view to protecting the original thief, does not fall within the ambitof this section. That being so, the appeal is allowed and the convictionquashed.