Naparo Braima Al-hassan V. Commissioner Of Police (1944)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Criminal Law—Corruption—Criminal Code, s. 394.

Facts

Defendant was the ” Stock ” man on a Government farm and was convicted by a District Magistrate of corruption in that he had exacted £1 each from four labourers mentioned in the charges before engaging them. To prove system the prosecution called two witnesses, who gave evidence that money had been extorted from them by defendant, though there were no charges regarding these two witnesses. He argued that this evidence was inadmissible on the authority of Makin v. Attorney-General of N.S.W. (1894) A.C. 57, whilst the respondent relied on King v. Lovegrove, 1920, 3 &B., at p. 643. This was the main point on appeal. The other point was that the four labourers should have been treated as accomplices.

Held

that the fact of the appellant having previously extorted money from others had no specific connection with the charges at issue and the evidence was inadmissible as appellant denied having received the money stated in the charges.Held also, that as the four labourers did not seek out the appellant and offer him a bribe, they were mere victims.Held further, that as in his judgment the District Magistrate examined the evidence and decided on each charge separately without referring to the two alleged previous offences, it was clear that he had not been prejudiced by the inadmissible evidence.

The appeal is therefore dismissed.