OKUDZETO vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [1964]DLSC1937

Date	1964-11-06
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1964]DLSC1937

OLLENNU JSC

ACOLATSE JSC

BRUCE-LYLE J.S.C.

S. H. ANNANCY FOR THE APPELLANT.

J. N. K. TAYLOR SENIOR STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1964]DLSC1937
																																						<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" >OKUDZETO <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>COMMISSIONER OF POLICE <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p>[1964] GLR 588<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:
6 NOVEMBER 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">

S. H. ANNANCY FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

J. N. K. TAYLOR, SENIOR 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, ACOLATSE AND BRUCE-LYLE
JJ.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF BRUCE-LYE J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>Bruce-Lyle
J.S.C. delivered the judgment of the court. This is an appeal from the judgment
of Siriboe J. (as he then was) sitting in the High Court, Ho, and dismissing an
appeal from the convictions by the district magistrate sitting at Sogakope on 4
October 1963.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appellant was charged with eleven counts of stealing, ten of which related to
stealing of moneys and the remaining count to stealing of a kente cloth, the
moneys and cloth being the property of one Ben Agbakpe Okudzeto, the father of
the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the complainant). The appellant was
found not guilty on nine counts of stealing various sums of money and was
discharged but was found guilty on one count of stealing £G200 (count four) and
another count (count eleven) of stealing the kente cloth and was convicted and
sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment with hard labour and six months’
imprisonment with hard labour respectively, the sentences being concurrent.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The case
for the prosecution was that the complainant had a store at Adidome and
employed his son, the appellant, as a storekeeper at a monthly salary of £G12.
The complainant had two other stores outside Adidome and was therefore obliged
to travel to see to the business outside Adidome. According to him he was not
at Adidome on 1 March, 9 April, 11 April, 18 April, 24 April and 1 June 1963
and that when he was away on these dates the appellant was in charge of the
store and that he also handed over to the appellant the keys of the store and
of his house. Whenever the complainant left Adidome he never took stock of the
goods in the store and also there was no stock-taking on his return; the
appellant only accounted to him in respect of sales made during his absence.
When he returned from his last trek on 11 June 1963 he got to know that the
appellant had bought a three ton lorry and had also invited 150 persons to an
outdooring ceremony of his baby at Ho and when he questioned the appellant as
to how he came by the money, the appellant said nothing. Thereafter the
appellant was not seen for four days. During the appellant’s absence, the
complainant forced open the appellant’s room and found his kente cloth, which
he usually kept in his locked box lying on the bed of the appellant. He also
found in the appellant’s room a hire-purchase agreement relating to a vehicle
bought in the name of one Isaac Kubame, a bank paying-in slip, a Ghana passport
in the name of Yao Gamfat Okudzeto and an international certificate of
innoculation and vaccination in the name of Gamfat Okudzeto. The complainant
also discovered that he had lost an amount of £G5,000 which he kept in the box
in which he also kept his kente cloth. The complainant became suspicious of
having lost these moneys from the store and reported to the police and upon
investigation by the police it was discovered that the appellant in the month
of February 1963 opened a savings account with the Adidome branch of the Ghana
Commercial Bank with the initial deposit of £G1 and in the name of Gamfat Yaw
Okudzeto. On 1 March 1963 the appellant again opened a separate savings account
with £G200 in the name of Winfred Gameli Fatorwome. On 22 March 1963 the
appellant opened a current account with the same bank in another name of
Winfred Gamfat Gameli. On 5 March 1963 the appellant applied to the bank for a
loan of £G600 and he was granted £G300 and he used his savings book showing the
deposit of £G200 as his security for the loan. The appellant on 5 December 1962
opened an account with Barclays Bank, High Street, Accra, with a deposit of
£G10. Upon these facts the appellant was charged with the eleven counts of
stealing.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On count
four relating to the stealing of £G200, his defence was that the amount was
given to him by his father, the complainant, as a loan to enable him to open an
account with the Ghana Commercial Bank at Adidome. The father denied having
lent the appellant £G200. On count eleven, relating to the stealing of the
kente cloth, the appellant’s defence was that the cloth was given to him by his
father per a brother by name Obert Doe Okudzeto for safe-keeping. The father
and Obert denied this line of defence.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The trial
magistrate in acquitting the appellant on counts one, two, three, five, six,
seven, eight, nine and ten found that the prosecution failed to prove that the
complainant had lost any moneys or goods from the store and in convicting the
appellant on count four r</main>