Yusufu Khatri v. R., Crim. App. 78-A-69, 25/4/69, Platt J.

Yusufu Khatri v. R., Crim. App. 78-A-69, 25/4/69, Platt J.

The appellant was convicted on his own plea (inter alia) of forgery c/s 337, Penal Code. The facts, which were unclear, seemed to be that the appellant had written a cheque for   Shs. 700/- which was to be paid to a certain taxi-driver. The cheque was drawn on an account which had already been closed. In pleading the appellant is recorded as having stated “it is true”, and after the statement of facts, as saying: “I do agree with everything in the charge sheet.”

            Held: (1) “It is clear that the proceedings were irregular ……. Recording a plea in the terms “it is true” is very unsatisfactory. If the facts put forward are merely those of the charge in an important offence such as forgery, the prosecution and the court run a risk of having the proceedings set aside. As is clear from what I have said above, it is not really known how this offence arose, but possibly if the facts had been fully set out, the learned Magistrate might have realized that the charge could not be supported.” (2) “But apart from that it is quite clear that on the authority of Reg. v. Martin, 5 Q.B. D. 34 that as the cheque was not an instrument false in itself, there could be no question of forgery. “ (3) Appeal allowed.