Republic Vrs Salifu and 2 Others [2023] GHACC 282 (8 June 2023)

CORAM: HIS HONOUR FESTUS FOVI NUKUNU SITTING AT THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GHANA HELD AT OLD TAFO ON THURSDAY 8TH JUNE, 2023 CC/75/2023 THE REPUBLIC VRS 1. RASHID SALIFU 2. ALHASSAN MOHAMMED 3. ANYASS YUSSIF --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The three accused persons were charged with Conspiracy to commit crime to wit causing unlawful damage, unlawful entry and stealing contrary to section 23 (1), 172(1) b, 152 and 124 (1) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29), causing unlawful damage, contrary to section 172(1) (b) of Act 29, unlawful entry contrary to section 152 of Act 29, causing unlawful damage, contrary to section 172(1) (b) of Act 29 and stealing, contrary to section 124 (1) of the same Act 29. 1st accused elected to speak Twi whilst the 2nd and 3rd accused persons elected to speak Hausa. The three accused persons pleaded guilty to count 1, count 3 and count 5. They however pleaded not guilty to count 2 and count 4. Count one Conspiracy to commit crime to wit causing unlawful damage, unlawful entry and stealing contrary to section 23 (1) and 172 (1) b, 152 and 124 (1) of the criminal offences Act 1960 (ACT 29) PLEA OF A1- GUILTY PLEA OF A2-GUILTY PLEA OF A3-GUILTY Count two Page 1 of 5 Causing Unlawful Damage: Contrary to Section 172 (1b) of the Criminal Offences Act 1960, (Act 29) PLEA OF A1- NOT GUILTY PLEA OF A2- NOT GUILTY PLEA OF A3- NOT GUILTY Count three Unlawful Entry Contrary to Section 152 of the Criminal Offences Act 1960, ACT 29 PLEA OF A1- GUILTY PLEA OF A2- GUILTY PLEA OF A3- GUILTY Count four Causing Unlawful Damage; Contrary to Section 172 (1) b of the Criminal Offences Act 1960, ACT 29 PLEA OF A1- NOT GUILTY PLEA OF A2- NOT GUILTY PLEA OF A3- NOT GUILTY Count five Stealing; Contrary to Section 124 (1) of the Criminal Offences Act, Act 29 PLEA OF A1- GUILTY PLEA OF A2- GUILTY PLEA OF A3- GUILTY The brief facts of the case according to prosecution are that complainant in this case a police inspector stationed at the Airport Police Station. 1st accused is a driver and a resident of Aboabo. The 2nd accused is a tricycle rider and a resident of Duase. 3rd accused is a fashion designer and a resident of Airport Roundabout. On 5th day of March, 2023 at about 2:00 am, the complainant was on duty at Buokrom Estate Junction snap check point with one other police personnel. Whilst there, he spotted a yellow tricycle with three persons on board. That upon suspicion, he stopped the tricycle and conducted a search in it. The complainant found two fertilizer sacks which contained electrical cables. The complainant managed to arrest the three accused persons to the station and upon interrogation, they revealed that they stole the cables from a house at Abirem - Kenyasi. Police escorted the accused persons to Abirem – Kenyasi unto the uncompleted storey building. Police detected that the accused broke into Page 2 of 5 the said building through the main gate and back windows to steal seven bundles of electrical cables and pipes all value GH¢ 7, 850.00. Police also observed that the accused persons cut some of the electrical wires on the ceiling thereby causing considerable damage to the entire housing wiring system value GH¢ 64, 190.00. After investigations, the accused were charged and put before this Honourable Court. As indicated earlier, the three accused persons pleaded guilty simpliciter to the first, third and fifth counts. As accused persons were not represented by counsel, it was incumbent on the court to ensure that they understood the plea of guilt and its effects and also that their pleas were made voluntarily. To that end, I asked them the following questions: By court: Accused persons, you pleaded guilty to three counts. Is that so? A1: Yes. A2: Yes. A3: Yes. By court: Do you appreciate the process so far? By A1- Yes. A2- Yes. A3- Yes. By court: What is your level of education A1- JHS 1 A2- JHS 2 A3- SHS graduate By court: Do you have any mental issue? By A1: We are sound. A2: We had a clear mind. A3: We are normal. By court: Do you take any substance like wee or any drug? A1- No. A2: No. A3: No. By court: Were you forced to come and plead guilty? Did any anyone from the court or police station forced you to plead guilty A1- No, my plea was voluntary. Page 3 of 5 A2- No, it was voluntary. A3- No, it was voluntary. From the answers provided by the accused persons, it was evident that they made the pleas voluntarily and they understood them to mean they indeed committed the offences. Accordingly, I convicted them on their pleas on the three charges. As state earlier, the three accused persons pleaded not guilty to count 2 and count 4. Prosecution prayed the court to withdraw count 2 and count 4. The court granted the prayer and struck out count 2 and count 4. Sentencing: In punishing the 1st accused person, the Court will consider the mitigating and aggravating factors espoused in the cases of Quarshie v The Republic (2018) JELR 66200 (CA) and Frimpong alias Iboman v. the Republic Criminal Appeal No. J 3/5/2010 delivered on 18th January 2012. In FRIMPONG ALIAS IBOMAN VRS THE REPUBLIC [2012] 1 SCGLR 297 at 328, the first and young offenders are to be given the second opportunity to reform and play their role in society as useful and law - abiding citizens. They are normally treated leniently compared to second or habitual offenders. See also the dictum of Kpegah J. (as he then was) in the case of Impraim v. The Republic [1991] 2 GLR 39-47 in which he stated that in considering the sentence to be given to an accused either upon first trial or during appeal, the courts had to take into consideration ‘the gravity of the offence taking into account all the circumstances of the offence. In this wise, regard must be had to such matters as the age of the offender, his health, his circumstances in life, the prevalence of the offence, the manner or mode of commission of the offence — whether deliberately planned and executed — and other like matters.’ Considering the fact that the convicts had pleaded guilty at the earliest possible stage which is the first date of arraignment in court thereby saving the State the time and expense of going through a trial to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. By his early plea, the convict had saved the State from the expenses of a trial. Convict are also first time offenders. This is their first brush with the law and it is in the interest of the reformative element of the criminal justice system that when persons have had their first brush with the law, they be given an opportunity at reformation. Page 4 of 5 Notwithstanding these mitigating factors, the accused planned to commit the offence. The accused persons having tampered the wiring system of the housing have caused a considerable loss to the complainant especially this time where building materials are expensive. Also, the crimes of unlawful entry, causing unlawful damage and stealing especially of electrical cables and pipes are on the rise in the area. It is my view that something drastic ought to be done to rid the area of these crimes. I must state that per our law, the charges upon which the accused persons were convicted could attract a prison term of up twenty – five (25) years. See Section 296(5) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1960 (Act 30). The convicts spent few weeks in lawful custody before the day of sentencing. Article 14 (6) of the 1992 Constitution reads: “Where a person is convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment for an offence, any period he has spent in lawful custody in respect of that offence before the completion of his trial shall be taken into account in imposing the term of imprisonment”. Upon these considerations, I have decided to deal leniently with the accused persons by imposing a lesser punishment on the accused persons. I sentence the accused persons to twenty – four months’ imprisonment in hard labour and a fine of one hundred penalty unit on count 1, count 3 and count 5. In default of payment of fine, the accused persons shall serve additional one year imprisonment in hard labour. The sentences are to run concurrently. Restitution Order: Let the items retrieved from the accused persons be released to the complainant, Aminu Yakubu. SGD ------------------------------------------ H/H FESTUS FOVI NUKUNU (CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE) CHIEF INSPECTOR ERIC ASARE FOR THE REPUBLIC PRESENT CONVICT: YOU HAVE A RIGHT OF APPEAL AGAINST THE SENTENCE Page 5 of 5