Bhanbir s/o Versi and another v. R., Crim. App. 429-D-69, 1/8/69, Mustafa J.

Bhanbir s/o Versi and another v. R., Crim. App. 429-D-69, 1/8/69, Mustafa J.

The appellants were convicted of being a common nuisance c/s 170, Penal Code. They had driven a car through a quiet residential area at 11 p. m and the car had backfired several times in a manner sounding like gun-fire, annoying and disturbing the residents, one of whom gave chase. The trial court found that the appellants had deliberately caused the car to backfire.

Held: “Here a motor vehicle in the course of a short time produced 5 explosions yet when this vehicle was driven to the police station shortly thereafter with a policeman as passenger, no noise or explosion was heard at all. I cannot think the presence of a policeman would have produced this noiseless affect. Learned counsel …. Contends the prosecution did not produce evidence to show whether the vehicle in question was prone to back fire. I should have thought in normal circumstances a vehicle does not backfire, and if it does the knowledge would be peculiarly within the knowledge of appellants and his friends. However appellants elected to remain silent and said nothing and gave no explanation at all. In these circumstances the only possible reasonable inference is appellant and his friends deliberately and intentionally caused the vehicle to backfire.” Appeal dismissed.