Deprecated: mysql_connect(): The mysql extension is deprecated and will be removed in the future: use mysqli or PDO instead in /home/ghanalegal/domains/ghanalegal.com/public_html/engine/Drivers/mysql.php on line 101 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v. E.K.A. JOHNSON | GhanaLegal - Resources for the legal brains

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v. E.K.A. JOHNSON


  • appeal
  • 1961-05-12
  • SUPREME COURT
  • 1 GLR 227-228
  • Print

VAN LARE, SARKODEE-ADOO AND AKIWUMI, JJ.S.C.


Summary

Criminal law?-Receiving stolen property?-Denial of possession precludes accused from giving explanation?-Doctrine of recent possession.

Headnotes

On the 26th October, 1960, the appellant had bought six cases of beer from those charged with him, knowing that they were part of 100 cases of beer stolen by the co-accused. On the 20th October, 1960, a different lot of 100 cases of bear had been stolen by the same persons. The appellant was convicted of receiving stolen property, namely the 100 cases stolen on the 20th October. He completely denied possession of the beer in question but admitted the purchase of six cases of beer from the lot stolen on the 26th October.

Judgement

APPEAL against conviction for receiving stolen property by Judge Jiagge in the Circuit Court, Accra, on the 3rd March, 1961.

JUDGMENT OF VAN LARE, J.S.C.

Van Lare, J. S. C. delivered the judgment of the court. [His lordship stated the facts and continued:] The appellant could not give any explanation of his possession by purchase of the said 100 cases of beer because of his complete denial of the purchase. His case was that he had bought only six cases of beer, and that it was in respect of them that he had given evidence in the case, the proceedings of which we have received in this appeal and marked exhibit S.C.1. Upon a study and perusal of the exhibit, exhibit S.C.1., we agree with the trial circuit judge that the appellant would wish to have the court confused with proceedings in that case which we find were entirely different from the matter in the present appeal. The appellant bought six cases of beer from those charged together with him on the 26th October, 1960, in that case from a different lot of 100 cases of beer, also stolen by the co-accused from the same brewery. The present charge concerns the theft of another lot of 100 cases of beer stolen on the 20th October, 1960, and this lot, it has been clearly established on the evidence, was sold to the appellant on the same date, but the appellant has denied possession and thus rendered himself unable to give any explanation. Following the cases of R. v. Aves,1 and R. v. Garth2 we are satisfied that as the appellant has been proved to have been in recent possession of stolen property on the 20th October, 1960, and he has offered no explanation to account for his possession, guilty knowledge on the charge of receiving stolen property was rightly inferred by the trial circuit judge. We therefore dismiss the appeal.

Decision

<P>Appeal dismissed.</P>

Plaintiff / Appellant

Koi Larbi

Defendant / Respondent

K. Dua Sakyi

Referals

(1) R. v. Aves [1950] 2 All E.R. 330; 34 Cr. App.R. 159, C.C.A.

(2) R. v. Garth [1949] 1 All E.R. 733; 33 Cr. App.R. 100, C.C.A.

Warning: fopen(/home/ghanalegal/domains/ghanalegal.com/public_html/cases/public/cache/180d7f84bed2a6e9c4f477fab04f4578): failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/ghanalegal/domains/ghanalegal.com/public_html/cases/apps/modules/render/models/cache.php on line 44 Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/ghanalegal/domains/ghanalegal.com/public_html/cases/apps/modules/render/models/cache.php on line 46 Warning: fclose() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/ghanalegal/domains/ghanalegal.com/public_html/cases/apps/modules/render/models/cache.php on line 48