Control of Padi and Rice Act 1994 · s 23

Suggest a correction

Tell us what is wrong in this text. We check every suggestion against the official version before we change anything.

What is wrong?Wrong or mistyped wordsWrong structure or numberingWrong title or detailsText that appears twice

What should change, and whyUp to 2,000 characters.The text as it should read (optional)

23.
Burden of proof
(1)	 In a prosecution in respect of an offence under this Act or any regulation made thereunder upon a charge of doing an act which is unlawful, unless the person doing the act is entitled to do so by reason of his being the holder of a licence, permit or written permission, consent, authorization or exemption entitling him to do the act, it shall be sufficient for the prosecution to allege and prove his doing the act and the onus shall then be upon the accused to show that he was entitled to do such act.
(2)	 In a prosecution in respect of an offence under this Act or any regulation made thereunder, the production by the person conducting the prosecution of an original invoice or a duplicate invoice proved to have been found in the possession of the seller, shall, where the person conducting the prosecution so requests, be admitted as prima facie evidence of a sale by the seller and

24
Act 522
of the facts stated in the original invoice or duplicate invoice and notwithstanding the provisions of any law to the contrary for the time being in force, the burden of proving that the sale did not take place or that any fact stated in the original invoice or duplicate invoice is not what it is stated to be, shall lie upon the accused.

Edit the text above. Up to 20,000 characters.Where you checked it (optional)A link to the official version, if you have one.

The text as we hold it

Open the official text

s 23Burden of proof

(1)

In a prosecution in respect of an offence under this Act or any regulation made thereunder upon a charge of doing an act which is unlawful, unless the person doing the act is entitled to do so by reason of his being the holder of a licence, permit or written permission, consent, authorization or exemption entitling him to do the act, it shall be sufficient for the prosecution to allege and prove his doing the act and the onus shall then be upon the accused to show that he was entitled to do such act.

(2)

In a prosecution in respect of an offence under this Act or any regulation made thereunder, the production by the person conducting the prosecution of an original invoice or a duplicate invoice proved to have been found in the possession of the seller, shall, where the person conducting the prosecution so requests, be admitted as prima facie evidence of a sale by the seller and

of the facts stated in the original invoice or duplicate invoice and notwithstanding the provisions of any law to the contrary for the time being in force, the burden of proving that the sale did not take place or that any fact stated in the original invoice or duplicate invoice is not what it is stated to be, shall lie upon the accused.