DOWUONA vs. THE STATE [1964]DLSC1899

Date	1964-05-22
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1964]DLSC1899

OLLENNU JSC

APALOO JSC

AKAINYAH J.S.C.

APPELLANT IN PERSON.

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

[1964]DLSC1899
																																						<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" >DOWUONA <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>THE STATE <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p>[1964] GLR 361<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:
22 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">

APPELLANT IN PERSON.<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 JJ.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 judgment of the court. On 1 May 1964, we allowed the
appeal of the appellant against his conviction, quashed his conviction and the
sentences passed upon him, and ordered him to be acquitted and discharged. The
following are the reasons for our said judgment and order.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appellant was convicted by the circuit judge, Accra, on 4 March 1963. He was
the fourth of six defendants tried upon an indictment containing twelve counts;
four of the counts concerned him, namely, count one which charged him jointly
with all the other five with conspiracy to steal, contrary to sections 23 (1)
and 124 of the Criminal Code, 1960,1 count four which charged him and the sixth
defendant jointly with stealing an amount of £G1,800, contrary to section 124 of
the Criminal Code, as amended by section 2 of the Criminal Code (Amendment)
(No. 3) Act, 1963,2 and counts five and seven each of which charged him alone
with forgery, contrary to section 159 of the Criminal Code, 1960. He was
acquitted on count four, stealing, and convicted on counts one, five and seven.
The appellant appealed against his convictions on the general ground that the
verdict in each case is unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to
the evidence.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The case
for the prosecution is briefly as follows: All the persons charged jointly with
the appellant, with the exception of the sixth defendant, were employees of the
Bank of West Africa Ltd., Tudu Branch, Accra. On 9 November 1961, the sixth
defendant opened a current account with the said bank in the name of Eric
Nee-Lamptey, with an initial sum of £G91. During the course of the same month,
November 1961, his said account was credited with two sums of money, £G1,600
and £G1,800 1s. 2d.; the credit of the £G1,600 was made upon authority
appearing on a payment order called “Mail Transfer Schedule,” exhibit A in the
case, which purported to have issued from a Manchester Bank, and the credit of
the £G1,800 1s. 2d. was made upon authority on a “Mail Transfer Schedule,”
exhibit B in the case, which purported to have come from a Branch Bank at
Apapa, Nigeria. Each of those two mail transfer schedules were later, i.e. in
January 1962, discovered to be fraudulent. It is not known by what process
those forged documents got into the bank, but having got there, they went
through all the official routine of the bank, save that they were not seen by
the manager, the first prosecution witness, who would have received them if
they had come in the normal way, i.e. by registered post.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Before
the discovery of the fraud upon the bank, the sixth defendant had drawn almost
the total amount contained in the said two “Mail Transfer Schedules”; he did
this in two withdrawals; he drew £G1,600 on 23 November 1961, by cheque exhibit
C1 and £G1,800 on 30 November 1961, by cheque exhibit C2.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appellant lives in Christiansborg in the house of the Osu Mantse; that house
was searched upon the arrest of the appellant, and there, in the public office
of the Osu stool, an Imperial typewriter, exhibit R, property of the Osu stool,
was found. The tenth prosecution witness attached to the forensic laboratory of
the Criminal Investigation Department, Accra, put up as an expert on
typewriters types, gave evidence that the said typewriter must have been the
machine used to type the forged documents exhibits A and B.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The fifth
prosecution witness, gave evidence that in the morning of 30 November 1961,
when going to work, he travelled on a taxi together with the appellant and the
sixth defendant from a bus stop at Christiansborg to Tudu; that at Tudu, the
taxi stopped in front of the Tudu Bank, the appellant and the sixth defendant
alighted and went into the bank, while he the witness waited outside in the
taxi, that later the sixth defendant alone returned to the taxi holding a bag
which appeared to contain something; and the two of them, i.e.</main>