Pharmacy and Drugs Act, 1961 as the courts read it.

What is the possession, proof of which, without more, makes a person guilty of an offence under the said section 47 (1), unless he proved that his possession is lawful. Upon a proper construction of the section, the possession must be possession with knowledge of the nature and quality of the article; awareness that what is possessed is “opium or Indian hemp” or “residue from the smoking of opium or Indian hemp.” Physical possession without that knowledge is no offence. Without that knowledge there is no legal possession which can support the charge. Therefore to succeed on such a charge, the prosecution must rove legal possession; that is, in addition to proving physical or constructive possession, they must go further to lead evidence which establishes that the defendant had the requisite knowledge, or evidence from which it will be reasonable to presume that the defendant proved to be in possession well knew, or ought to have known, that the article he possessed was “opium or Indian hemp” or was “residue from smoking of opium or Indian hemp.”

AMARTEY v. THE STATE [1964] GLR 256 [1964] SLR (SC) 23 · Supreme Court · 1964 · OLLENNU JSC