COMMISSIONER OF POLICE vs. DANQUAH [1962]DLSC1413

Date	1962-10-26
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1962]DLSC1413

KORSAH JSC

C.J. JSC

ADUMUA-BOSSMAN JSC

MILLS-ODOI J.S.C.

DANQUAH FOR THE APPELLANT.

A. N. E. AMISSAH D.P.P. FOR THE RESPONDENT (THE STATE).

[1962]DLSC1413
																																						<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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">COMMISSIONER OF POLICE <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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">DANQUAH <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p>[1962] 2 GLR 144<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

DATE:<span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0"> 26TH OCTOBER, 1962.<o:p></o:p>

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

DANQUAH
FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

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

KORSAH, C.J., ADUMUA-BOSSMAN
AND MILLS-ODOI, JJ.S.C.<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. The evidence,
which is not disputed, is that at about 12 noon on the 20th May, 1961, the
appellant went to the shop of Michael Bou-Chedid, manager of B.B.C. Trading Co.
Ltd. and asked him to cash a cheque for £G10 saying that because the bank was
closed, the amount could not be drawn by the appellant from his account at the
bank. The cheque was dated the 22nd May, 1961, and the appellant told the
complainant that he could cash the cheque on Monday, the 22nd May, 1961, the
date on the cheque.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The complainant believing this representation, paid the sum of
£G10 to appellant and accepted the cheque; but when it was presented for
payment at the bank on the 22nd May, 1961, it was dishonoured. The appellant
was subsequently arrested, tried and convicted on the 30th August, 1961.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>At the trial, a representative of the bank gave evidence in which
he said the appellant had opened an account with the bank in July, 1959. He
produced a certified copy of the appellant’s statement of account with the
bank, which showed that on the 20th May, 1961, when appellant issued the cheque
in question, there was no credit in his account and that the last item to his
credit on the 27th April, 1961, was one shilling and sixpence. The witness
further stated that the appellant had not at any time been granted overdraft
facilities. Up to the 30th August, 1961, when appellant was convicted, the sum
of £G10 which he had obtained from the complainant in exchange for the said
cheque, had not been repaid.<o:p></o:p>In his defence, the appellant said he had not received a statement
of account from the bank since January 1961; that he could not remember the
bank paying money for him when he had no money in the bank; and that he drew
the cheque for £G10 and dated it the 22nd May, 1961, because he believed that
he would have had money in the bank to meet it, as he expected a friend who was
in Accra to pay money to his account on that date.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It is strange that, throughout the proceedings, the name of the
friend was not mentioned nor was he called as witness. In these circumstances
the court rightly held that when the cheque was drawn for the amount thereof to
be paid on a certain date, there was a representation that it would be met on
that date, either because there was money in the bank to honour it or because
arrangements had been made for the necessary funds for the bank to pay the
amount for which the cheque was drawn.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The evidence proves conclusively that the pretence made by the
appellant was false to his knowledge, when he represented that he had money
then in the bank, or, at least reason- able hope that there would be money
available to the bank, to pay the amount called for by the cheque, on the
occasion he obtained the £G10 in exchange for what turned out to be a spurious
cheque which was dishonoured on presentation.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><a name="_gjdgxs"></a>The principle upon which this
conviction can be supported was enunciated in R. v. Hazelton,1(1) where it was
said that to obtain goods in exchange for a cheque, falsely pretending that the
cheque will be honoured on presentation, is to obtain goods, not credit, by
false pretences. In R. v. Parker,2(2) it was stated that:<o:p></o:p>