Bogaars vs Karunaratne – clr volume 1 page 080

In BOGAARS v. KARUNARATNE, the court considered whether the Supreme Court should exercise its revisional jurisdiction to overturn the acquittal of KARUNARATNE by the Magistrate under the Cemeteries Ordinance, where an appeal was available but not pursued by the Attorney General. The court determined that interference by way of revision was not warranted in circumstances where an appeal could have been filed, underscoring the procedural principle that revisionary power should generally not be used as a substitute for the right of appeal. The judgment relied on established procedural doctrines, highlighting the limited use of revision when statutory appeal rights exist.

Clarence J. — It was held that there was no justification for interfering by way of revision with the Magistrate’s order