Wakilii

Rex v Sunderji (Criminal Appeal No. 96-1935.)

East African Court of Appeal · [1935] EACA 130 · 1935 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from conviction for receiving stolen property
Decision
Conviction for receiving stolen property upheld

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

Where property is entrusted to a person who converts it to their own use and disposes of it, the offence of theft is complete as soon as there is an overt act showing departure from the instructions regarding the property. The intention to convert may be conceived at or after receipt of the property. Once theft is established through such overt act, the foundation for a charge of receiving stolen goods with guilty knowledge is laid. Appeal dismissed.

Outcome

Conviction for receiving stolen property upheld

Facts

The first witness gave a bale of paper to the second and third witnesses to convey to the station. On the way to the station, the second and third witnesses decided to sell the bale to the appellant. They sold the bale to the appellant at a low price. The appellant was charged with receiving stolen goods. There was no dispute that the appellant had guilty knowledge if the goods were stolen prior to receipt.

Issues

  1. Whether property entrusted to persons who subsequently converted it to their own use had been stolen prior to its receipt by the appellant, thereby sustaining a charge of receiving stolen goods.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Theft — Receiving Stolen Property — Property Initially Lawfully Possessed
Where property is entrusted to a person for a particular purpose and that person converts it to their own use, the offence of theft is complete as soon as there is an overt act showing departure from the instructions regarding the property, regardless of whether the intention to convert was conceived at the time of receipt or subsequently.
Theft — Conversion — Overt Act Establishing Theft
An overt act manifesting departure from instructions regarding entrusted property establishes theft when it results in wrongful gain to the persons entrusted with the property and wrongful loss to the owner, and such overt act need not be the actual sale of the property.
Receiving Stolen Property — Foundation for Charge
Once theft is established through an overt act showing conversion of entrusted property, the foundation for a charge of receiving stolen goods with guilty knowledge is laid, even where the initial possession by the thief was lawful.

Legislation cited (1)

  • Larceny Act 1916

Cases cited (3)

  • R v John Stock (1 Mood 86)
  • R v Jackson (2 Mood 32)
  • R v Miscll and others (19 Cr App R 109)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Rex v Sunderji (Criminal Appeal No. 96-1935.) [1935] EACA 130 (1 January 1935)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.