R. v. Saidi Crim. Rev. 31-D-70; 13/4/70; Georges, C. J.

 

R. v. Saidi Crim. Rev. 31-D-70; 13/4/70; Georges, C. J.

One Saidi was convicted of hunting an elephant without a licence contrary to section 12(1) and 53(1) (a) and (c) (i) of the Fauna Conservation Ordinance Cap. 302 and hunting in a controlled area contrary to section 11(1) (a) and 53 (1) (a) and (c) (i) of the same Ordinance. A pair of elephant tusks found at this house and the gun which he used to shoot the elephant was forfeited to the Republic. A memorandum of appeal then was filed by one Ramadhani Salehe who stated that the gun was his and that he had passed it on to Saudi by way of transfer. He asked that the forfeiture be quashed.

            Held: (1) “It is clear on the authorities that an order for the forfeiture of a gun should not be made under the Fauna Conservation Ordinance or any other comparable legislation unless the owner has had an opportunity of advancing reasons why the order should not be made. Where, as in this case, the accused person has stated that the gun was not his, the decision on forfeiture should be reserved until after service of an appropriate notice on the owner to show cause why there should not be forfeiture.” (2) “For this reason I shall quash the order for forfeiture of the gun and remit the matter to the District Court Handeni. Notice of a date of hearing must be issued to Ramadhani Salehe and he must be heard on the issue of forfeiture.”