3PLR – HELWANI AND GOUCH V. C.O. P.

POLICY, PRACTICE AND PUBLISHING, LAW REPORTS  3PLR

[PDF copy of this judgment can be sent to your email for N300 only. Just order through lawnigeria@gmail.com and info@lawnigeria.com or text 07067102097] 

HELWANI AND GOUCH

V.

C.O. P.

WEST AFRICAN COURT OF APPEAL

ACCRA, 2ND SEPTEMBER, 1946.

11 WACA 61.

3PLR/1946/3 (WACA)

BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS:

M’CARTHY, AG. C.J. (GOLD COAST), JACKSON AND KORSAH, JJ.

BETWEEN

HELWANI AND GOUCH

AND

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

REPRESENTATION

Quist for first Appellant.

Akufo Addo for Second Appellant.

Ollennu for Respondent.

MAIN ISSUES

CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Receiving Stolen Property – Gold Coast Criminal Code – Sections 284 (1) and 43 (1)-  Possession passing from thief to receiver- How treated

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE:- Criminal proceedings – Evidence of accomplices-Corroboration – Relevant considerations

MAIN JUDGMENT

The following joint judgment was delivered:

These are appeals from the judgment of the Divisional Court, Sekondi, confirming convictions by the District Magistrate, Sekondi. The first appellant who was the first accused in the District Magistrate’s Court was convicted of dishonestly receiving stolen property contrary to section 284 (1) of Cap. 9, and the second appellant who was the filth accused in the trial Court was convicted on charges of conspiracy to steal and stealing.

At the conclusion of the hearing of the appeals this Court dismissed them, and intimated that reasons would be given later.

As regards the first appellant the only ground of appeal of any substance was ground 5 (a) which reads as follows.-

“ Because the Court was wrong in holding that the facts proved by the prosecution amounted in law to dishonestly receiving.”

It was proved that the appellant had driven in his motor car at night near to the scene of the theft of several cases of motor spare parts from a military depot for the purpose of transporting the stolen property to his house with a view to buying it from one of the thieves, and that this thief accompanied him in the car. That on reaching a place to which the cases had been carried by other thieves, the appellant turned his car and opened its boot for the reception of the cases. After one case had been put into the boot, officers and other members of the military police who were lying in wait rushed up to the car. The appellant though called upon to stop by a European officer attempted to drive away, but was with some difficulty stopped and taken into custody.

PAGES 62/3 MISSING.