Try asking the following...
JUDGEMENT
JUDGMENT OF QUASHIE-SAM J.
On 19 January 1972 I made an order quashing the order of the District Magistrate's Court, Asamankese, made on 27 July 1971, recommending deportation of 32 aliens after their trial by the court and reserved my reasons. I now give my reasons for granting the order of certiorari.
[p.401]
The applicant, Ide Zabrama and 31 others were arraigned before the District Court II at Asamankese charged with the following offence as shown in the record of proceedings:
"Being in Ghana without valid documents: Section 12 (1)(e) of Act 160/63. Being in a Prohibited Area without permit: Section 9A (1) and (4) as amended by N.L.C. Decree 259/68 and Regulation 9 (1) [sic.] and 2 (1) of L.I. 612/69 of Act 160/63."
Though the record of proceedings shows only one statement of offence, it recites two offences, namely, being in Ghana without valid documents and being in a prohibited area without permit. Furthermore the record of proceedings shows no particulars whatsoever in support of the offence or offences but states that all the applicants pleaded guilty to both charges.
On the face of the record the applicants were made to plead to what purported to be two charges under one statement of offence and until then the trial court itself was not seised with the information upon which the prosecution had been mounted. This information was narrated verbally in the court only after the plea, whereupon the court convicted and sentenced each person to four months' imprisonment with hard labour with a recommendation for deportation after serving sentence. That the charge disclosed no particulars of offence is a gross irregularity or error on the face of the record for, especially in a charge such as being in a prohibited area without permit, it is necessary to disclose the particular prohibited area or areas and other particulars necessary for giving reasonable information to the person or persons facing the charge or charges as to the case he or they have to answer.
The mandatory provisions of section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1960 (Act 30), as amended by the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 1965 (Act 261), s. 1. are: [His lordship here read the provisions as set out in the headnote and continued:] It is apparent on the face of the record that these mandatory provisions were omitted in framing the charge or charges in this case.
In the case of the Commissioner of Police v. Wenyonu (1958) 3 W.A.L.R. 459, C.A. where similar circum