{"id":1059571,"date":"2026-06-07T17:46:23","date_gmt":"2026-06-07T15:46:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/"},"modified":"2026-06-07T17:46:23","modified_gmt":"2026-06-07T15:46:23","slug":"supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 28 f\u00e9vrier 2020, 2020 PL2 8 – Pce v Maudar"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

P a g e | 1<\/p>\n

Pce v Maudar<\/p>\n

2020 PL2 8<\/p>\n

POLICE v MAUDAR Mohammad Ryaad<\/p>\n

CN:6298\/16 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF PORT LOUIS (2 nd Division) In the matter of:<\/p>\n

POLICE V MAUDAR Mohammad Ryaad<\/p>\n

JUDGMENT Accused stands with the offences of: 1. Distributing films not bearing classification of the board in breach of Reg 7(1) of GN 126\/09 coupled with Sections 21 (c) 23 (2) (c) and 24 of the Films Act 41\/200. 2. Carrying out classified trade without paying the prescribed fee in breach of Sect 122(1)(a) (3) and 158(1)(e\\) of Local Government Act 36\/11 The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges and was duly represented by Counsel. Prosecution called witness no.1, PS Allybocus, who read and produced defence statement of the accused, marked as Doc A. The witness was duly cross-examined. Prosecution called witness no.2, PC Mohun, who read and produced defence statement of the accused, marked as Doc B.<\/p>\n

P a g e | 2<\/p>\n

The witness was duly cross-examined. Prosecution then called witness no.4, CPL Lacharmante, who related that on 09\/01\/16, whilst in company of CPL Meharally, he saw accused selling DVD films on a box on the streets. The witness approached the accused and asked for his permit, to which he replied: \u201cDVD pe liquider. Prend aller fer Cuma dire fine ramasser lors chemin\u201d. As the accused held no permit, he was warned of the offence. Upon carrying out a check, the officer noticed that the films bore no classification symbol allotted by the FCB. The accused together with the DVDs were taken to the office where same were counted in presence of the accused. The DVDs were then taken to the FCB for viewing and the accused did not attend the viewing session. The DVDs were produced and marked as Exh 1 collectively. The witness was duly cross-examined. Prosecution called witness no.5, Mr Ajay Hoolooman, who stated that he has been deputed to testify on behalf of the FCB in the present case. The witness explained the procedures regarding how films are classified. In view of the recurrent non-attendance of witness no.6, Prosecution closed its case. Case was then closed for the Defence. Counsel for Prosecution left matters in the hands of the Court. Counsel for Defence made a short submission. The Court has considered the evidence with attention. The Court took note of the following: \u2022 The representative of the Film Classification Board could not explain whether or not the films were in fact classified or not, given he was not the officer involved in the present case. \u2022 Regulation 7 (1) of GN 126\/2009 reads as follows: \u201cNo person shall distribute a film unless – (a) the film has been duly classified by the Board; and (b) the cassette, disc, disc sleeve or cassette jacket containing the film bears the classification symbol allotted to the film by the Board.\u201d \u2022 There is therefore, no indication as to whether the DVD films seized in the present matter were classified and allotted classification symbols or not and whether any such application was made by the accused company or not. In the absence of any evidence to this effect from the FCB, the Court is of the view that the offence has not been established.<\/p>\n

P a g e | 3<\/p>\n

\u2022 With regard to count II, in the absence of witness no.6, there is no evidence on record to establish the offence.<\/p>\n

Therefore, the Court finds that the Prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt under count I and count II and accordingly dismisses count I and count II.<\/p>\n

Mrs Manjula Kumari Boojharut ( A. Senior District Magistrate) Delivered on 28 February 2020<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Sources officielles :<\/strong> consulter la page source<\/a> · PDF officiel<\/a><\/p>\n

Supreme Court of Mauritius – public domain<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

P a g e | 1 Pce v Maudar 2020 PL2 8 POLICE v MAUDAR Mohammad Ryaad CN:6298\/16 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF PORT LOUIS (2 nd Division) In the matter of: POLICE V MAUDAR Mohammad Ryaad JUDGMENT Accused stands with the offences of: 1. Distributing films not bearing classification of the board in breach of Reg 7(1) of GN…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":[],"kji_country":[92666],"kji_court":[92667],"kji_chamber":[127592],"kji_year":[41198],"kji_subject":[7646],"kji_keyword":[8457,130200,15757,15594],"kji_language":[7611],"class_list":["post-1059571","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-maurice","kji_court-supreme-court-of-mauritius","kji_chamber-mrs-manjula-boojharut-acting-senior-district-magistrate","kji_year-41198","kji_subject-divers","kji_keyword-fevrier","kji_keyword-maudar","kji_keyword-mauritius","kji_keyword-supreme","kji_language-anglais"],"yoast_head":"\nSupreme Court of Mauritius, 28 f\u00e9vrier 2020, 2020 PL2 8 - Pce v Maudar - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 28 f\u00e9vrier 2020, 2020 PL2 8 - Pce v Maudar\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"P a g e | 1 Pce v Maudar 2020 PL2 8 POLICE v MAUDAR Mohammad Ryaad CN:6298\/16 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF PORT LOUIS (2 nd Division) In the matter of: POLICE V MAUDAR Mohammad Ryaad JUDGMENT Accused stands with the offences of: 1. Distributing films not bearing classification of the board in breach of Reg 7(1) of GN...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\\\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 28 f\u00e9vrier 2020, 2020 PL2 8 - Pce v Maudar - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-07T15:46:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/criminal-law-attorneys-in-paris-counsel-and-strategic-defense\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 28 f\u00e9vrier 2020, 2020 PL2 8 – Pce v Maudar\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp\",\"width\":1000,\"height\":1000,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 28 f\u00e9vrier 2020, 2020 PL2 8 - Pce v Maudar - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 28 f\u00e9vrier 2020, 2020 PL2 8 - Pce v Maudar","og_description":"P a g e | 1 Pce v Maudar 2020 PL2 8 POLICE v MAUDAR Mohammad Ryaad CN:6298\/16 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF PORT LOUIS (2 nd Division) In the matter of: POLICE V MAUDAR Mohammad Ryaad JUDGMENT Accused stands with the offences of: 1. Distributing films not bearing classification of the board in breach of Reg 7(1) of GN...","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/","name":"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 28 f\u00e9vrier 2020, 2020 PL2 8 - Pce v Maudar - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-06-07T15:46:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-28-fevrier-2020-2020-pl2-8-pce-v-maudar\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/criminal-law-attorneys-in-paris-counsel-and-strategic-defense\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 28 f\u00e9vrier 2020, 2020 PL2 8 – Pce v Maudar"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp","width":1000,"height":1000,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/1059571","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1059571"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=1059571"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=1059571"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=1059571"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=1059571"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=1059571"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=1059571"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=1059571"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}