114-NLR-NLR-V-22-THEGIS-v.-AGONIS.pdf
( 376 )
1920.
[In Revision.]
Present: De Sampayo J.
THEGIS v. AGONIS.
P. G, AvissaweUa, 30,633.
Criminal trespass—Civil dispute—Accused discharged—Accused orderedto bring civil action—Irregular.
The accused was charged with criminal trespass. The Magistratethought that the case involved a civil dispute and discharged theaooused, but ordered that he should bring a civil action.
HdM, that the Magistrate had no right to make the order relatingto possession and directing the accused to bring a civil action.
H. V. Perera, tor the applicant.
J.Joseph, tor the respondent.
May 14,1920. De Sampayo J.—
The accused were charged in this case with having committedoriminal trespass in respect of a field which the complainant claimedto be his own. The Magistrate, after some inquiry, rightly cameto the conclusion that the case involved a civil dispute, and shouldbe settled in a civil court. But at the same time he examined aVidane Araohohi, and thought that the complainant had hadpossession previously, and, after discharging the accused, orderedthat the accused should bring a civil action, and as counsel for thecomplainant admitted, this means that the complainant was to berestored to possession as the result of this order and the accuseddriven to the civil court. The Magistrate had no right to makesuch an order as this, and in revision I set aside .the portion of theorder relating to possession and requiring the accused to bring anaction.
Set aside.