The Supreme Court was satisfied that the learned trial judge adequately
considered the matters in this appeal. That She found the contradictions
minor and not intended to deceive or mislead the Court. She rejected the
theory that the appellant was framed by the police as an afterthought.
Court was also satisfied that the learned trial judge correctly applied the
doctrine of recent possession of stolen property to convict the appellant
and rejected his defence of alibi.
It was held that the facts were incompatible with the innocence of the
appellant, and incapable of explanation upon any other hypothesis
than that of the guilt of the appellant. Accordingly the appeal was