KWAKYE AND ANOTHER vs. THE STATE [1965]DLSC1823

Date	1965-11-12
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1965]DLSC1823

OLLENNU JSC

AKAINYAH JSC

LASSEY J.S.C.

VICTOR OWUSU FOR THE FIRST APPELLANT.

CASELY-HAYFORD FOR THE SECOND APPELLANT.

GYEKE-DAKO SENIOR STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1965]DLSC1823
																																						<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" >KWAKYE AND ANOTHER<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;vs.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;THE STATE <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p>[1965] GLR 647<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:
12 NOVEMBER 1965.<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 FIRST APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

CASELY-HAYFORD FOR THE SECOND APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

GYEKE-DAKO, 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, AKAINYAH AND LASSEY 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. The indictment in this case charged
the two appellants jointly with two counts, namely, conspiracy to steal and
stealing. The amount involved is a huge sum of money, £G52,000 being a portion
of an amount of £G83,000 which the complainant had won on a football pool. The
assessors, with whose aid the trial was held, were unanimous in opinion that
each of the appellants was guilty on each of the two counts. And, in his
lengthy and well-considered judgment, the learned trial judge, Apaloo J.S.C.,
found each of the appellants guilty as charged and convicted them.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>As the
facts are set out clearly and at length in the judgment of the High Court, it
is unnecessary to repeat them; therefore only such portions of them as are
relevant for the determination of the issues raised in this court will be
referred to in the course of this judgment.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In the
first two grounds of appeal filed on behalf of the second appellant it was
contended that the trial and conviction of the appellants were a nullity and
that their committal by the district court for trial in the High Court was
itself a nullity, because no evidence was taken before the district court upon
which that court could in law form the opinion that there was a case for the
appellants to answer. There is no dispute that the procedure for committal as
expressly laid down in Part IV, sections 181 to 190 of the Criminal Procedure
Code, 1960,1 for committal for trial for an indictable offence, was prima facie
followed in this case, namely:<o:p></o:p>(1) The
appellants were brought before the district court on indictment;<o:p></o:p>(2) The
prosecution furnished the district court and each of the appellants with:<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">(a) A
bill of indictment which complied with the provisions of sections 201 and 202
of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1960, and which stated in writing the charges
against the appellants;<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">(b) A
summary of evidence which comprised a list of the witnesses whom the prosecution
proposed to call at the trial and summary of evidence to be given by each
witness and a list of the documents and things it proposed to put in evidence
at the trial;<o:p></o:p>(3) The
bill of indictment and summary of evidence were signed by the Attorney-General
or some person authorised by him in that behalf; and<o:p></o:p>(4) The
district court formed the opinion that there was a case for the appellants to
answer and consequently committed them for trial.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>