TAYLOR vs. THE REPUBLIC [1976]DLHC447

Date	1976-02-09
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1976]DLHC447

QUASHIE-SAM J.

DR. TACKIE OTOO FOR THE APPELLANT.

ASAFU-ADJAYE ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE REPUBLIC.

[1976]DLHC447
																																						<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" >TAYLOR <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH
COURT, SEKONDI]<o:p></o:p>[1976] 2 GLR 1<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
9 FEBRUARY 1976.<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">

DR. TACKIE OTOO FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

ASAFU-ADJAYE, ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY, FOR THE
REPUBLIC.<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">

QUASHIE-SAM J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF QUASHIE-SAM J.<o:p></o:p>This
appeal is by the appellant against a sentence of two years’ imprisonment with
hard labour passed on him on 28 October 1975, on his conviction on his own plea
of guilty to a charge of possessing Indian hemp purported to have been brought
under a section 47 (7) of the Pharmacy and Drugs Act, 1961 (Act 64), a
subsection which is non existent in the Act.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Though
the appeal is only against sentence, counsel for the appellant has in this
court sought to have the conviction set aside on the ground of nullity, the
appellant having pleaded guilty to a non-existent subsection of the Act.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On that
submission this court on 11 February 1976, gave a reasoned ruling that the
trial did not amount to a nullity since the error in laying the charge under a
non-existent subsection (7) of Act 64 was an irregularity or error not
amounting to a miscarriage of justice by virtue of section 406 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1960 (Act 30), since the particulars of offence to which the
appellant pleaded guilty amply supported a charge under section 47 of Act 64
under which the appellant was charged.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>As
regards sentence with which this appeal is more concerned it has been submitted
by learned counsel for the appellant that the trail magistrate of the district
court grade II had no jurisdiction to impose a sentence to two years as his
jurisdiction is limited to one year under the Courts Act, 1971 (Act 372).<o:p></o:p>By
section 39 (2) (b) of that Act, the criminal jurisdiction of a district court
grade II with regard to sentence is limited to a term of imprisonment not
exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding ¢500.00 or both. Section 57 (2) of
the Pharmacy and Drugs Act, 1961 (Act 64), as amended by the Pharmacy and Drugs
(Amendment) Act, 1963 (Act 222), provides that:<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">“57. (2)
A person guilty of an offence under this Act—<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) Where
the offence relates to a narcotic drug, shall be liable—<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(i) On conviction on indictment, to a
fine not exceeding one thousand pounds, or imprisonment for a term not
exceeding ten years, or both;<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(ii) on summary conviction, to a fine
not exceeding two hundred and fifty pounds, or imprisonment for a term not
exceeding twelve months, or both; <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) where
the offence is that of supplying of opium or Indian hemp or of cultivating
Indian hemp contrary to section 28 (2) or section 49 of this Act, as the case
may be, and in each case the person has been convicted of that offence on two
previous occasions, shall be liable to imprisonment for life; <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">(c) where
the offence is that of smoking o</main>