Rex v Ali (Criminal Appeal No. 88 of 1943)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
An offence under the Essential Commodities (Control of Distribution) Regulations 1943 is not a war offence within the meaning of the Defence Regulations 1939, and Regulation 80 does not authorise arrest without warrant for such offences. Section 8(2) of the Tribal Police Ordinance 1929 does not confer authority for peremptory arrest without warrant. Where the record does not show that the tribal policeman complied with section 8(2) before effecting arrest, and the accused did not use excessive force in resisting the illegal arrest, the conviction must be quashed.
Outcome
Accused acquitted
Facts
Tribal police constables were sent by a police officer in charge of a police station to arrest persons found offending against an order made under the Essential Commodities (Control of Distribution) Regulations 1943. The accused, Mohamed Ali, resisted arrest. During the arrest, the tribal police knocked him down and overcame him. It was only after being knocked down that the accused drew his knife. The accused was convicted of assaulting a tribal police officer in the due execution of duty. The magistrate based the conviction on Regulation 80 of the Defence Regulations 1939 and alternatively on section 8 of the Tribal Police Ordinance 1929.
Issues
- Whether a tribal police constable was acting in the due execution of his duty when effecting an arrest without warrant for an offence under the Essential Commodities (Control of Distribution) Regulations 1943.
- Whether Regulation 80 of the Defence Regulations 1939 authorised arrest without warrant for offences under the Essential Commodities (Control of Distribution) Regulations 1943.
- Whether section 8(2) of the Tribal Police Ordinance 1929 authorised peremptory arrest without warrant in the circumstances.
- Whether the accused used excessive force in resisting an illegal arrest.
Orders
- Appeal allowed.
- Accused acquitted.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
- Essential Commodities (Control of Distribution) Regulations 1943
- Defence Regulations 1939 Regulation 80
- Defence Regulations 1939 Regulation 2
- Tribal Police Ordinance 1929 s.8
- Tribal Police Ordinance 1929 s.8(2)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.