JUSTICE Fidela Corbin-Lincoln will give her ruling on the missing diamonds case brought against the State in the first week of February, 2019.
The trial, which had been ongoing for seven years, came to a close last October, with Justice Corbin-Lincoln fixing a date in January for the ruling.

However, counsel of the applicant, Nigel Hughes, filed notice of absence for the date set since he was representing in another matter on the set date.
The judge will fix a new date for ruling in the first week of next month.
This case was brought to the High Court by the said owner of the diamonds, Ronald Khan, who contends that $54 million worth in diamonds were in police custody as evidence in a criminal trial, and he was never given back the merchandise after the trial and investigations were finished.

The elderly man, who had testified in the last hearing of the matter, told the court that he had a mining operation in the Ewang River, Potaro-Siparuni.
In 1994, there was an incident that occurred at his site where two persons were killed, his brother and another miner. He was also robbed of what he said was 430 carats of diamonds, worth $54 million. Khan explained that he had several scales which he used to weigh his diamonds to derive at an accurate measurement.

The day after the incident, he was taken from the hospital to the Mahdia Police Station to identify the men who robbed him and murdered the two men. Khan said the diamonds were retrieved from the criminals and he witnessed the police officers weighing the diamonds and verified the amount and its worth.

According to Khan, Constable Fraser told him that the police would have to lodge the diamonds as evidence in the trial of the two men he would have identified.
After this was done, he said that the officers then transported the items from Mahdia, to the ‘E’ and ‘F’ Divisions of the Guyana Police Force.

To date, he has never again seen his diamonds that were retrieved and lodged.
The State had argued on several submissions, the main one being that the minerals retrieved may not have been diamonds and there is no actual evidence confirming whether or not they were, and the true value.

Another point they had argued was the issue of limitations. In their submissions, the State pointed out that the action filed by Khan is statute-barred as it contravenes provisions of the Limitation Act.

“Every action and suit for any movable property, or upon any contract, bargain, or agreement relating to movable property, or to recover money lent without written acknowledgment or upon any account or book debt, or to recover any salary or the value of any goods sold and delivered, shall be brought within three years next after the cause of action or suit has arisen,” Section Six of the Act states.

Since the robbery of Khan’s mining camp occurred in 1994, the State advanced that he should have commenced civil proceedings to recover his property anytime within the three years therefrom.
In a matter of days, the decision of the court will be heard.