056-NLR-NLR-V-55-T.-T.-PERERA-Appellant-and-T.-P.-B.-MEDAWELA-S.-I.-Police-Respondent.pdf
184:
Perera v. Medawela
1953Present: Rose C.J.T. T. PERERA, Appellant, and T. P. B. MEDAWELA (S. I. Police),
Respondent
S. C. 25—M. C. Avissawella, 5,951
Motor Traffic Act, No. 14 of 1951—Section 15$—“ Running ftbard
In a prosecution for riding on a running board of a motor vehicle incontravention of section 158 of the Motor Traffic Act—
Held, that a running board which is inside a bus or car and does not projectoutside is not covered by the enactment.
1 Mossel Bay Divisional Council v. Oosthuizen {1933) O. P. D. 509.
ROSE C.J.— Vythilingam v, Vairamullu
185
■^^•PPEAL from a judgment of the Magistrate’s Court, Avissawella.
M. M. Kumarakvlasingham, with J. C. Thurairatnam, for the accusedappellant.
Mahendrarcijah, Crown Counsel, for the Attorney-General.
October 1, 1953. Rose C.J.—
This matter turns upon the interpretation of the phrase “ runningboard ” in section 158 of the Motor Traffic Act, No. 14 of 1951. Theappellant in this case, who is a ticket inspector, was apparently admittedlystanding on a platform, to use a neutral phrase, of a bus which isdescribed as a Nelson bus. The appellant called no evidence on his behalf,but Mr. Medawela, the Sub-Inspector of Police, who was called for theprosecution, said in cross-examination that in regard to the bus in questionthe running board was not a projection outside^ the bus but was withinthe body of the bus. In the absence of any definition in the Ordinance ofthe phrase “ running board ”, it seems to me that regard should be hadto the purpose of the section which is to prevent persons from standingon the running board so as to endanger themselves. It seems to me there-fore that a running board that projects from a bus or from a motor caror is outside a bus or a motor car would be covered by the section, butthat a board which is inside the bus or the car and does not projectoutside would not be so covered.
Having regard to the evidence and to the admitted facts in the presentcase, I consider that the offence has not been proved. The appeal willtherefore be allowed and the conviction quashed.
Appeal allowed.