AIDOO vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [1964]DLSC1862

Date	1964-05-01
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1964]DLSC1862

OLLENNU JSC

APALOO JSC

AKAINYAH J.S.C.

VICTOR OWUSU FOR THE APPLICANT.

R. J. HAYFRON-BENJAMIN JNR. PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1964]DLSC1862
																																						<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" >AIDOO<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;vs. <o:p></o:p>COMMISSIONER OF POLICE <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p>[1964] GLR 267<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:
1 MAY 1964.<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">

VICTOR OWUSU FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

R. J. HAYFRON-BENJAMIN, JNR., PRINCIPAL STATE
ATTORNEY, FOR THE RESPONDENT.<o:p></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">

OLLENNU, APALOO AND AKAINYAH J J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF OLLENNU J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>Ollennu
J.S.C. delivered the ruling of the court. The appellant-applicant on 8 November
1963, pleaded guilty before the District Magistrate, Kumasi, to a charge of
assault under section 84 of the Criminal Code, 1960,1 and was sentenced to a
fine of £G4 or one month’s imprisonment with hard labour. He paid the fine the
same day.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On 27
February 1964, Sarkodee-Addo C. J., exercising the jurisdiction and functions
of the High Court, by virtue of the powers in him vested by section 64 of the
Courts Act, 1960,2 revised the sentence as a judge of the High Court is
authorised to do by section 60 (1) (a) of the Courts Act, 1960, and varied the
same by the addition thereto of twelve months’ imprisonment with hard labour.
The order was served upon the applicant on 3 March 1964; in consequence thereof
the applicant was arrested and imprisoned.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Dissatisfied
with the enhancement of his said sentence, the applicant, on the same day (3
March 1964) lodged an appeal in this court against the additional sentence
imposed by his lordship the Chief Justice. He then applied to the High Court,
Kumasi, for bail pending the hearing of his appeal; but was unsuccessful.
Consequently he filed the present application for bail.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Learned
principal state attorney appearing for the State raised a preliminary objection
to the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the application, because, in his
submission, no appeal is pending before the court to warrant the court
entertaining an application for bail as it is empowered to do by section 22 of
the said Courts Act, 1960. He conceded that there is a right of appeal against
a revising order made by a High Court judge under section 60 of the Courts Act,
1960, that point having been decided previously in Opoku v. Commissioner of
Police3. He argued, however, that by virtue of section 18 (1) of the Courts
Act, 1960, notice of such appeal must be filed within ten days of the date of
conviction, unless the court or the court before whom the appellant was
convicted granted extension of the time. He argued further that the words “date
of conviction” have a fixed meaning, and that is: the date when conviction is
recorded against a person by the trial court, and not any subsequent date on
which sentence is passed by the trial court or by any higher court.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Counsel
submitted, therefore, that since the applicant was convicted by the district
magistrate on 8 November 1963, the latest date on which he could have appealed
against his sentence was 18 November 1963; and since the time within which he
could appeal has not been extended “by the Supreme Court or by the court before
whom the appellant was convicted,” the filing of the appeal on 3 March 1964,
about four months after the date of the conviction, contravened section 18 (1)
of the Courts Act, 1960, and therefore the appeal is not properly before the
court and consequently, the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the
application for bail.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>This
objection to the jurisdiction of the court is misconceived. The jurisdiction of
the court to hear appeals is set out in section 8 (1) (c) of the Courts Act,
1960, inter alia as follows: “the hearing of appeals from any decision given by
the High Court in any other matter whatsoever.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>