<p>TAYLOR J.: The appellant in this case was arraigned before the District Court Grade I, Wa, charged with stealing N¢33.00, the property of one Teiku Dagarti. The facts which the prosecution led and which were apparently not challenged are that one Teiku Dagarti was arrested on suspicion by the Nandom police and when he was searched on or about 11 April 1969, N¢36.00 and other articles not relevant to the present charge were found on him. It was not shown why he was arrested. The appellant was the Inspector of Police at the Nandom Police Station. The suspect Teiku Dagarti asked for N¢3.00 which was given to him and the police kept the balance of N¢33.00. Teiku Dagarti later absconded. There was no evidence as to the date when he ran away. On 12 August 1970 the appellant was requested to hand over his duties to another inspector, the second prosecution witness. On that day the appellant gave the second prosecution witness a post-dated cheque for the N¢33.00 with the explanation that he h…</p>