GARIBA v. THE STATE

JUDGMENT OF CRABBE J.S.C.

Crabbe J.S.C. delivered the judgment of the court. This appellant and another person who has not appealed (the second accused at the trial) were indicted at the Accra Criminal Sessions before Acolatse J. on two counts. The first count on which the appellant was acquitted, charged them with unlawfully entering the store of the Ghana National Construction Company with the intent to commit a crime therein to wit: stealing contrary to section 152 of the Criminal Code, 1960.1 The second count, on which the appellant was convicted, charged them with stealing various quantities of goods from the said store contrary to section 124 of the Criminal Code, 1960.2 The other accused person was convicted on both counts.

The sole ground of appeal is: "That the appellant is not guilty of the alleged crime to warrant conviction and sentence."

The facts are simple. At about 7 a.m. on the 18th June, 1960, the store-keeper of the Ghana National Construction Company, Accra, discovered that part of the store which was raised from the ground and built with welded mesh had been broken into. He entered the store and on inspection he found that 33 lorry outer covers, 12 batteries and 43 pieces of yellow dusters had been stolen. It would appear that the thieves carried these stolen goods to a spot near the Awudome cemetery along the Ring Road. In accordance with a previous arrangement, one of the confederates, a driver who was a witness in the case, drove his lorry early that same morning to the spot where he met the other accused and another man standing by the stolen goods. The driver agreed to carry them for a charge of £G3, and after the lorry had been fully loaded the driver was instructed to drive to Kasua-Gariba, a village about sixteen miles from Accra on the Winneba Road. Those on the lorry at the time were the other accused, the man who arranged the transport, and another. On the way the two men who were not prosecuted alighted and whilst the lorry was waiting they went into a certain house and later came out with the appellant. The appellant boarded the lorry with the others and the driver continued the journey to Kasua-Gariba. On arrival at Kasua-Gariba the appellant led the four men who were in the lorry to the house of the fifth witness for the prosecution. At the request of the appellant this witness permitted the thieves to pack the tyres under the shade of a tree in the compound of his house. The reason which the appellant gave this witne