Hassani s/o Mohamed v. R., Crim. App. 600-D-68, 30/10/68, Biron J.
Accused have a firearm to another person to deliver it for repairs. He pleaded guilty to a charge of unlawfully transferring a firearm c/ss. 15 and 31, Arms and Ammunition Ordinance,
Cap. 223. Before sentence, accused stated in mitigation; “The firearm was defective. It was to be sent for repair.” s. 15 makes it an offence for a person to “sell or transfer or buy or accept any arms and ammunition either by way of gift or for any consideration except in accordance with a permit signed by an authorized officer.”
Held: (1) For the transfer of a firearm to constitute an offence c/o 15, such transfer must be ejusdem generic – that is, of a similar type, kind or nature – with a sale, purchase, or gift. (2) “(Accused ’s) answer to the charge, taken in conjunction with his plea in mitigation …. To the effect that he had handed over his firearm … with the object of having it sent for repair, cannot be regarded as an unequivocal plea of guilty to the charge …. “ Conviction quashed.
0 Comments
PLACE YOUR COMMENT HERE
WARNING: DO NOT USE ABUSIVE LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW.
THE COMMENTS OF OUR READERS IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY.