<p style="text-align: center;"><strong><u>JUDGEMENT</u></strong></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>AMPIAH J.</strong></p><p style="text-align: justify;">The appellant was on 21 October 1979 convicted of selling salt above the controlled price and sentenced to a term of three months&#x27; imprisonment with hard labour by the learned magistrate at the Techiman District Court Grade I. She appealed against the said conviction and sentence. On 9 November 1979, I allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence. The appellant was consequently acquitted and discharged. I now proceed to give my reasons.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">The statement of offence read:</p><blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;">&quot;Selling above control price: contrary to sections 2 (1) and 3 (a) of the Price Control Decree, 1974 (N.R.C.D. 305), as amended by the Price Control (Amendment) Decree, 1977 (S.M.C.D. 93) and the Price Control (Amendment) Decree, 1978 (S.M.C.D. 146).&quot;</p></blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;">No reference was made to the executive instrument which specified the commodity and the price at which it should be sold. Counsel for the appellant submitted therefore that the omission rendered the whole charge and the consequential proceeding…</p>