LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Presumption from Possession of Stolen Goods — Section 149(a) Evidence Act
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Soon after a robbery, the presumption under section 149(a) of the Evidence Act applies when an accused is found in possession of stolen goods and cannot give a reasonable account of his possession.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in Eyisi & Ors v. State (2000) NLC-1601999(SC) at p. 20; Paras A–B.
"Soon after the robbery operation, the 1st and 2nd appellants were found in possession of the stolen records and none of them could give a reasonable account of his possession. Instead, each accused the other of being the owner of the records – See the presumption in section 149(a) of the Evidence Act."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Section 149(a) of the Evidence Act creates a presumption that a person found in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is either the thief or received the goods knowing them to be stolen. The presumption applies if the accused cannot give a reasonable account of possession. The presumption is rebuttable. The accused may explain lawful possession. The “soon after” requirement is flexible; it depends on the circumstances. The presumption is a rule of evidence, not a substantive offence. The court may convict based on the presumption together with other evidence. The principle assists the prosecution in proving theft or robbery. The accused must offer a credible explanation; bare denial is insufficient.