Thabiti Ngalile v. R., Crim. App. 902-D-67, 7/2/68, Biron J.

Thabiti Ngalile v. R., Crim. App. 902-D-67, 7/2/68, Biron J.

Accused was charged in two separate counts with shopbreaking [P.C. s. 296(1)] and stealing [P.C. s.265] and was convicted on both counts. Both counts referred to the single act of breaking into complainant’s shop. A confession which accused made to a TANU ten house leader was admitted into  evidence. A second confession, which was made to police officers after accused had been cautioned, was also admitted officers after accused had been cautioned, was also admitted.

            Held: (1) The offence of shopbreaking and stealing created by Penal Code section 296(1) is a composite offence in itself. The second count of stealing was therefore superfluous. (2) The confession to the Police Officers was inadmissible under section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1967 even though accused had been cautioned. (3) “Although there appears to be a not infrequent practice of ten-cell leaders exercising powers of arrest, they have in fact no greater powers of arrest, they have in fact no greater powers of arrest than those of an ordinary citizen.” Therefore they should not be equated with police officers for the purposes of section 27 of the Evidence Act, and the confession made to the ten house leader was admissible. (4) The introduction of the confession to the Police Officers did not prejudice accused. Conviction on first count affirmed; sentence on second count set aside.