THE QUEEN V. ABUAH

• Pages: 269-274

THE QUEEN V. ABUAH.



269

begin if and when it is alleged (which is not the case here) that the administrative

powers have not been exercised in accordance with the Ordinance; it is these func-

tions of the Courts which are protected by the Constitution.

Appeal dismissed.

THE QUEEN V. ABUAH.

THE QUEEN



RESPONDENT

V

A.C. ABUAH



APPELLANT

15





SUIT NO. FSC 243/1961

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT.

ADEMOLA,



C.J.F.

BRETT,



F.J.

UNSWORTH,



F.J.

20



30th October, 1961.

Criminal Law - Forgery - Uttering - Obtaining by False pretences - Criminal

Code Cap. 42 sections 419, 464(b), 465, 468, - Intent to defraud.

25



Evidence- of co-accused - Corroboration.

ISSUES:

1.

Whether the verification of a forged thumb-print of an illiterate person on a

document is also a forgery.

30



2. Whether proof that a forged document was presented by the accused to a third

party as genuine, and that the third party acting on the document, gave money

to the accused, is sufficient to justify a conviction on charges of forgery, uttering,

and obtaining by false pretences.

3.

Whether the evidence of a co accused implicating the accused in the forgery

35



of a document, is sufficiently corroborated by a false verification of the

document executed by the accused.

4.

Whether the uttering of a false document with intention that it should be acted

upon as genuine by a third party who acts upon it and parts with money, shows

an intention to defraud.

40

FACTS:

The Appellant a legal practitioner had represented one Akande in proceedings

in which there was a settlement for £100. The £100 was paid into court and the

court made an order for its payment out to Akande. The Appellant sought pay-

ment to himself but was informed that the money could be paid out to Akande only

45



or to someone who had his written authority to receive it. Later, the Appellant

presented a document to the court cashier purporting it to be such authority to re-

ceive payment, and the money was paid out to him. The document was executed

by thumb- print and the thumb-print was verified by the Appellant. The verifica-

tion stated that the thumb-print was that of Akande.

50



The Appellant informed Akande that he had received the money but refused to

pay it over until his fees were agreed upon. After discussions, the fees were agreed

at £20 and the appellant turned over the balance of £80 to Akande.

5

10