NYARKO AND OTHERS v. THE STATE

JUDGMENT OF MILLS-ODOI J.S.C.

Mills-Odoi J.S.C. delivered the judgment of the court. On the 31st May, 1963, this court dismissed the appeal of Kwadjo Nyarko, the first appellant but it allowed the appeals of Kwabena Okyere alias Branu and Michael Koku alias Koku French, second and third appellants respectively. We now give our reasons for so doing.

The three appellants were tried at the Circuit Court, Ho, and convicted by the circuit judge sitting with assessors upon an indictment which charged them with having in their possession 46.6 grams of Indian hemp which had been prepared for smoking.

The case for the prosecution was that on the 26th March, 1962, detective constable Victor Adufo (the first witness for the prosecution) who was on patrol duty at Jasikan saw the three appellants walking together in the street at about 8 a.m., Kwadjo Nyarko, the first appellant, was holding a handbag; the other two had nothing on them. The first witness for the prosecution went to the appellants and when he asked the first appellant of the contents of the handbag, the second and third appellants ran away. He therefore took the first appellant to the workshop of a tailor, Samuel Nyagbode (the second witness for the prosecution). In the presence of the second witness for the prosecution, Victor Adufo (the first witness for the prosecution) requested the first appellant to bring out the contents of the handbag; whereupon the first appellant brought out 37 wrappers which he said contained Indian hemp. At that juncture the first witness for the prosecution told the first appellant that he was under arrest and placed him in the custody of the second witness for the prosecution.

The first witness for the prosecution then left the store of the second witness for the prosecution and gave chase to the second and third appellants. He succeeded in catching up with the second appellant whom he arrested about 200 yards from the spot where he had previously apprehended the first appellant. He told the second appellant the reason for [p.61] his arrest; but the second appellant denied possessing the handbag or knowledge of its contents. The second appellant was escorted by the first witness for the prosecution to the second witness for the prosecution's shop and subsequently taken to Jasikan Police Station in the company of the first appellant. The handbag and the 37 wrappers with their contents were also taken to the police station. The third appellant was at large.

On the 23rd