JUDGMENT OF AZU CRABBE J.A.
Azu Crabbe J.A. delivered the judgment of the court. On 2 May 1969, at the Criminal Session of the High Court, Accra, before Edward Wiredu J., sitting with the aid of a jury, the two appellants and four others, were arraigned on an indictment containing three counts. The first and second counts, in so far as these concern the two appellants, read as follows:
"FIRST COUNTCOUNT
STATEMENT OF OFFENCE
Conspiracy to Steal: Contrary to s. 23 (1) and s. 124 of the Criminal Code Act 29/60.
PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE
No. 6445 GC/2 CHRISTIAN KWASHIE, No. 5140 EC/3 PETER A. ADJAWOO, No. 14682 EC/3 YAW WORNOO, AUGUSTINE KWAME MENSAH, KOFI NARTEY, TEI OTIBOE, On or about the 15th day of April, 1967 at Akama, village near Tema, acted together with a common purpose in committing a crime, to wit, stealing.
SECOND COUNTCOUNT
STATEMENT OF OFFENCE
Stealing: Contrary to s. 124 of the Criminal Code Act 2960.
PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE
No. 6445 GC/2 CHRISTIAN KWASHIE, No. 5140 EC/3 PETER ADJAWOO, No. 14682 EC/3 YAW WORNOO, AUGUSTINE KWAME MENSAH, KOFI NARTEY AND TEI OTIBOE: On or about the 15th day of April, 1967 at Akama village, near Tema, did steal 8 cases of tobacco, 4 cases of matches, 4 cases and 9 cartons of Rothman's King size cigarettes, all to the total of N¢3,171.00, the property of one Madam Koiki Adgbleame Torgbor.”
At the close of the case for the prosecution the learned trial judge ruled that there was no case to answer on count one, and he accordingly discharged the appellants and the others on that count. The third accused was also discharged on count two, for reasons which we think, with respect, are not quite satisfactory; but the appellants, and two other accused persons, who are not appealing, were called upon to answer the [p.491] charge as laid in count two. The appellants and their confederates were found guilty by the jury, and each was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment with hard labour.
The two appellants have each appealed to this court on grounds alleged in their notice of application for leave to appeal against conviction. The ground alleged by the first appellant is: "That the appellant is not guilty of the alleged crime to warrant conviction and sentence and should be acquitted and discharged." The ground alleged by the second appellant also is: "That I am not guilty of the alleged crime to warrant my conviction and so I should be discharged and acquitted."
In this court, counsel for the first appellant, Mr.
