ANANG vs. THE REPUBLIC [1986]DLCA836

Date	1986-03-13
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1986]DLCA836

TAYLOR J.S.C.

ABBAN J.A.

AMPIAH J.

NARH FOR THE APPELLANT

OSAFO SAMPONG FOR THE REPUBLIC.

[1986]DLCA836
																																						<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" ><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

ANANG <o:p></o:p>

{COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA} <o:p></o:p>

[1984-86] 1 GLR 458<o:p></o:p>

DATE:
13 MARCH 1986<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>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">

NARH FOR THE APPELLANT. <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 1.0pt 0in">

TAYLOR J.S.C., ABBAN J.A. AND AMPIAH J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF TAYLOR J.S.C<o:p></o:p>Taylor
J.S.C. delivered the judgment of the court. This is an appeal from concurrent
findings of guilt by two courts presided over by learned judges and it is
therefore necessary since we unanimously consider that the conclusions arrived
at in these courts are erroneous in law, to set down fully the legal reasons
which compel us to disagree with the judgments of these courts. It was for this
reason that after hearing the arguments of counsel on 17 February 1986 we
decided at once to give judgment allowing the appeal and adjourn to today to
give well considered reasons for our decision.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The case
commenced its unfortunate career to this court when the appellant, a private
secretary employed by the State, was arraigned before the circuit court judge
in Accra on 13 December 1984 on a charge of stealing ¢30,000, the property of a
High Court judge, contrary to section 124 (1) of the Criminal Code, 1960 (Act
29). The particulars which accompanied the statement of offence, quite
important as will appear hereafter, read:<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">“Samuel Okpoti
Anang: clerk for that you during the month of January 1983 at Accra in the
Greater Accra Circuit and within the jurisdiction of this court did steal cash
an amount of ¢30,000 the property of Justice Ashrifie Gogo.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>(The
emphasis is ours.)<o:p></o:p>In order
to appreciate the ratio decidendi of our judgment it is essential at this stage
to keep firmly in mind the date and place of the alleged offence as well as the
precise amount said to be stolen. This is because these are some of the stated
particulars and the burden of establishing them was what the representative of
the Republic undertook to discharge in mounting the prosecution.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Be that
as it may, on 26 February 1985 after a trial lasting a few days the appellant
was convicted and sentenced to a day’s imprisonment by the learned circuit
judge. In addition the judge ordered him to enter into a bond of ¢2,000 with
one surety to be of good behaviour for a period of two years or in default six
months’ imprisonment with hard labour. His appeal to the High Court against his
conviction was dismissed on 29 July 1985 by the learned High Court judge but on
17 February 1986 as we have indicated already, we allowed his appeal from the
judgment of the High Court and we quashed his conviction and set aside the
sentence imposed on him.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
decisive facts of the case devoid of irrelevant material are very simple
indeed. The story begins some time in January 1983 when the complainant’s son
in the United Kingdom remitted to him ¢30,000 through one Mr Prempeh. Towards
the end of that month the said Mr Prempeh called at the offices of the
appellant, an employee of the Judicial Service and private secretary of the
Chief Justice, and left him a parcel containing the ¢30,000, to be given to the
complainant.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>