R vs. OBODDAE [1959]DLCA2046

Date	1959-12-11
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1959]DLCA2046

KORSAH C.J.

VAN LARE J.A.

GRANVILLE SHARP J.A.

[1959]DLCA2046
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">R <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">OBODDAE<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[COURT OF APPEAL]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1959] GLR 436<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE:
11TH DECEMBER, 1959.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

KORSAH C.J., VAN LARE J.A., AND
GRANVILLE SHARP J.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF KORSAH C.J.<o:p></o:p>Korsah
C.J. delivered the judgment of the court.<o:p></o:p>(After
stating the facts his lordship proceeded:-)<o:p></o:p>It will
be observed that apart from the statement of the appellant to the effect that
deceased followed him to his (appellant’s) room, no other witness has testified
that the parties left the yard at any time prior to the deceased’s crying out
that he had been stabbed. Furthermore, the allegation of the appellant that
deceased followed him to the room alleges merely that deceased grasped him (the
appellant) with both hands. There is no evidence of any fight in the room, even
if the appellant’s version were accepted.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On appeal
to this Court, however, Counsel for appellant has raised an important question
of law, which had obviously been overlooked at the trial. Neither Counsel for
the defence, nor Counsel for prosecution, mentioned it during the proceedings,
and. it is obvious that the learned Judge did not give consideration to it in
the course of the proceedings or in the summing-up. It is raised in the 1st ground
of the additional grounds of appeal, and is as follows:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“That the
wife of appellant was not a compellable witness and the learned Judge should
not have allowed her to be called by the prosecution.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>This
ground is based on the common law rule, which in Mary Grigg’s Case ((1660) T.
Raym, 83 E. R.1) was stated thus. A wife cannot be admitted at common law to
give evidence against her husband, or vice versa, in any indictable crime other
than treason. And in R.v. Brittleton ((1884 12 Q.B. 266), upon a trial of a
married woman jointly with another person for larceny of the property of her
husband, the husband was called as a witness against his wife. It was held that
the evidence of the husband was improperly received, and the conviction which
had taken place, founded upon it, was bad against both prisoners.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>To this
rule, however, there have been important exceptions, e.g. (a) Treason (Griggs’
Case) and (b) where the crime is one of violence, and affects the person of
wife or husband (The Lord Audley’s Case (123 E. R. 1140)).<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It will
be observed that the common law rule was restricted to persons legally married,
and has been modified by various English statutes, e.g. Criminal Evidence Act,
1898. The law in this regard, applicable to this country, is contained in
section 122 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code which reads:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“In any
enquiry or trial the wife or husband of the person charged shall be a competent
witness for the prosecution or defence without the consent of such pers</main>