The Republic Vrs Sulley & 5 Others [2023] GHADC 434 (6 February 2023)

The Republic Vrs Sulley & 5 Others [2023] GHADC 434 (6 February 2023)

A1 was found guilty of stealing as he appropriated and dealt with the complainant's property dishonestly, without consent, and failed to return it. A2, A4, and A5 were acquitted of dishonestly receiving as the prosecution failed to prove they knew the phones were stolen. A3 was found guilty of causing unlawful damage, unlawful entry, and stealing, as evidence established he broke into the shop, caused damage, and appropriated property without consent.

Citation
[2023] GHADC 434
Parties
Prosecution: The Republic; Accused: Salisu Sulley (A1); Accused: Fatawu Fuseini (A2); Accused: Hardi Kudus (A3); Accused: Adam Kudus (A4); Accused: Jorbrila Karim (A5); Accused (at Large): Faisal Nantomah (A6)
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
6 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judgment
Outcome
A1 convicted of stealing; A2, A4, A5 acquitted of dishonestly receiving; A3 convicted of causing unlawful damage, unlawful entry, and stealing.
Legal Topics
Stealing, Dishonestly Receiving, Causing Unlawful Damage, Unlawful Entry, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Stealing Dishonestly Receiving Causing Unlawful Damage Unlawful Entry Burden of Proof

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Republic

Prosecution

Salisu Sulley (A1)

Accused

Fatawu Fuseini (A2)

Accused

Hardi Kudus (A3)

Accused

Adam Kudus (A4)

Accused

Jorbrila Karim (A5)

Accused

Faisal Nantomah (A6)

Accused (at Large)

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether A1 is guilty of stealing under section 124(1) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29)
  2. 2 Whether A2, A4, and A5 are guilty of dishonestly receiving under section 146 of Act 29
  3. 3 Whether A3 is guilty of causing unlawful damage under section 172 of Act 29

Ratio Decidendi

A1 was found guilty of stealing as he appropriated and dealt with the complainant's property dishonestly, without consent, and failed to return it. A2, A4, and A5 were acquitted of dishonestly receiving as the prosecution failed to prove they knew the phones were stolen. A3 was found guilty of causing unlawful damage, unlawful entry, and stealing, as evidence established he broke into the shop, caused damage, and appropriated property without consent.

Court Disposition

A1 convicted of stealing; A2, A4, A5 acquitted of dishonestly receiving; A3 convicted of causing unlawful damage, unlawful entry, and stealing.

Orders

  • A1 sentenced to a fine of 300 penalty units or 8 months imprisonment in default.
  • A3 sentenced to fines of 50, 50, and 200 penalty units for counts three, four, and five, or 3, 2, and 7 months imprisonment in default, to run cumulatively.