Rex v Deaf and Dumb Person (Cr. R. 62-1931.)
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
The Court held that under the Vagrancy Ordinance there is no power to alter an order of detention into an order of imprisonment with or without hard labour. The word detention in section 11 refers to a house of detention for vagrants declared under section 4, not a detention camp. The sentence of one month's hard labour was quashed and the accused ordered to be detained under the Vagrancy Ordinance in a house of detention.
Outcome
Sentence of imprisonment quashed; accused ordered detained in house of detention under Vagrancy Ordinance
Facts
A deaf and dumb vagrant was sentenced by a Magistrate under section 11(1) of the Vagrancy Ordinance to one month's detention. After the vagrant escaped for a few hours, the Magistrate altered the sentence to one month's hard labour. The proceedings were sent to the Supreme Court under section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code for review.
Issues
- Whether a Magistrate has power under the Vagrancy Ordinance to alter an order of detention into an order of imprisonment with hard labour.
Orders
- Sentence of one month's hard labour quashed.
- Accused ordered to be detained under the Vagrancy Ordinance in a house of detention.
- Provisions of the Vagrancy Ordinance to be applied to this case.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
- Vagrancy Ordinance s.11
- Vagrancy Ordinance s.11(1)
- Vagrancy Ordinance s.4
- Criminal Procedure Code s.162
- Detention Camps Ordinance
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.