Search a Keyword!

Search our legal repository for any term from articles, statutes to cases

Eric Annan Ogoe & Anor V. The Inspector-General of Police (1937) LJR-WACA

Eric Annan Ogoe & Anor V. The Inspector-General of Police (1937)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Appeal from Divisional Court, Gold Coast, exercising Appel-late jurisdiction

There is no necessity to set out the facts.ticm.

R. S. Blay for Appellants.

A. J. Ainlie for Respondent.

The following joint judgment was delivered :-

KINGDON, C.J., NIGERIA, PETRIDES, C.J., GOLD COAST, AND WEBBER, C.J., SIERRA LEONE.

The two accused in the Magistrate’s Court at Tarkwa were each fined £20 or three months’ imprisonment with hard labour in that on the 24th September, 1936, at Abosso, by their act or otherwise did aid and abet one Kweku Jackson in the commission of a crime to wit ” Keeping a common gaming house contrary to sections 46 (1) and 442 Cap. 29.”

They appealed to the Divisional Court, which gave judgment dismissing their appeal, and from that judgment they now appeal to this Court.

The former of the two sections above mentioned relates to abetment of crime and the latter to the keeping of a common gaming house. A common gaming house is not defined, but in the Criminal Code Ordinance a gaming house is defined as follows :—

” Any building or premises kept or used by any person without lawful authority for the purpose of directly or indirectly making gain by providing any facilities for betting or for playing of any game of chance for money or money’s worth.”

There is no evidence of providing facilities for betting, and the only evidence on which the accused were convicted for keeping a building for the purpose of making gain by providing facilities for playing a game of chance was the evidence of a sergeant of police, who states that he saw a congregation of people playing a game called

See also  F. & M. Khoury & Ors V. Philip Said Azar & Ors (1952) LJR-WACA

ludo for money. He does not describe the game, and there is no evidence whatever what the game of ludo is and whether it is a game of skill or a game of chance.

It is unnecessary to deal with the other grounds of appeal ; it is sufficient to say that there is no proof that this building was used for purpose of gain by providing facilities for the playing of games of chance.


The findings and sentences are accordingly reversed and the appellants are acquitted and discharged.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *