REPUBLIC VRS BUGBILA (UE/BG/DC/B4/2/2023.) [2023] GHADC 751 (27 October 2023)

*HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* CORAM: HIS WORSHIP MR. MAWUKOENYA NUTEKPOR (DISTRICT MAGISTRATE), SITTING AT THE DISTRICT COURT, BOLGATANGA IN THE UPPER EAST REGION OF GHANA, ON FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023. CASE NO. UE/BG/DC/B4/2/2023. THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA TIME: 11:34AM ACCUSED PERSON -- PRESENT INSPECTOR REGINA ALI AGONG FOR THE REPUBLIC PRESENT ALBERT ZOOGAH, ESQ. FOR THE ACCUSED PERSON ABSENT JUDGMENT Introduction 1. The accused person was brought or arraigned before this court on the 22nd day of August, 2022 for the offence of Assault contrary to Section 84 of the Criminal and Other Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29) as amended. The accused person pleaded NOT GUILTY to the charges against him. On the 22nd day August, 2022, the court in consideration of the relationship between the accused person and the complainant as husband and wife with two children referred the case to the Court Connected Alternative Dispute Resolution pursuant to section 73 of the Courts Act, 1993 (Act 459) as amended. The said section provides that: “Any court, with criminal jurisdiction may promote reconciliation, encourage and facilitate a settlement in an amicable manner of any offence not amounting to felony and not aggravated in degree, on *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 1 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* payment cases of compensation or on other terms approved by the court before which the case is tried, and may during the pendency of the negotiations for a settlement stay the proceeding for a reasonable time and in the event of a settlement being effected shall dismiss the case and discharge the accused person.‖ However, the complainant and the accused person were unable to resolve the matter out of court, so the court proceeded to determine the case on its merit. Case of the Prosecution 2. The Prosecution case as can be gleaned from the brief facts attached to the charge sheet filed on 19th August 2022 is that the complainant and the accused person got married about 8 years ago and were living together; they are blessed with two children. On 02/02/2022, they had a misunderstanding over the maintenance of the house and in the process; the accused person assaulted the complainant. The matter was reported to DOVVSU-BOLGA and during investigation, police medical form was issued to the complainant to attend Hospital for treatment and endorsement, and same was returned duly endorsed by a medical officer of Bolgatanga Regional Hospital. The accused person in his cautioned statement admitted the offence to the police. Both Parties were paraded before the station officer and in an attempt to resolve the matter; the accused person was given a stern warning to desist from such behavior. However, the station officer instructed that the case should not be closed because she wanted to monitor the situations between them. Whilst monitoring, on 14/08/2022 about 8:00 pm, the accused returned from town and without any provocation attacked the complainant and subjected her to severe beatings and in the process packed some of her belongings into his car and forcibly dragged her into the car went and dumped her and the children with complainant's mother that he is tired of the complainant and can no longer continue with the marriage. The matter was again reported to the unit. Police medical form was issued to the complainant to attend hospital for medical examination, treatment and endorsement. The form and he submitted his report to the effect. The accused was subsequently arrested, cautioned and after investigation he was *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 2 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* charged with the offence of Assault and brought before his Honourable Court. Burden of Proof 3. In a criminal case where an accused person pleaded not guilty, it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused person. Article 19 clause (2)(c) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana provides that: ―A person charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed to be innocent until he is proved or has pleaded guilty.‖ The proof required in a criminal case is proof beyond reasonable doubt. The Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323), outlines this in subsections 11(2) and 13(1) and Section 22 as follows: 11(2) ―In a criminal action the burden of producing evidence, when it is on the prosecution as to any fact which is essential to guilt requires the prosecution to produce sufficient evidence so that on all the evidence a reasonable mind could find the existence of the fact beyond a reasonable doubt. 13(1) In any civil or criminal action the burden of persuasion as to the commission by a party of a crime which is directly in issue requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Section 22: In a criminal action a presumption operates against the accused as to a fact which is essential to guilt only if the existence of the basic facts that give rise to the presumption are found or otherwise established beyond a reasonable doubt and thereupon in the case of a rebuttable presumption the accused need only raise a reasonable doubt as to the existence of the presumed fact‖. 4. The Supreme Court in a unanimous decision in the case of Abdulai Fuseini v The Republic, reported in [2020] Crim LR, page 331 reiterated and *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 3 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* affirmed prosecution in our courts as follows:- the basic philosophical principles underpinning criminal ―In criminal trials, the burden of proof against an accused person is on the prosecution. The standard of proof is proof beyond reasonable doubt. Proof beyond reasonable doubt actually means ―proof of the essential ingredients of the offence charged and not mathematical proof.‖ Emphasis supplied 5. In the case of Miller Vrs Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 ALL ER 372 at 373 Lord Denning (as he then was) explained proof beyond reasonable doubt as follows: “It need not reach certainty but it must carry a high degree of probability, proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond a shadow of doubt. The law would fail to protect the community if it admitted fanciful possibilities to deflect the course of justice … If the evidence is so strong against a man as to leave only a remote possibility in his favour, which can be dismissed with the sentence ‗of course, it is possible but not in the least probable‘, the case is proved beyond reasonable doubt, but nothing short of that will suffice.‖ Emphasis supplied 6. In the case of Dexter Eddie Johnson Vrs the Republic [2011] SCGLR 601 Dotse JSC discussed the principle of proof beyond reasonable doubt in some detail and cited the case of Woolmington Vrs DPP [1934] AC 462 where Lord Sankey made the following statement: ―Throughout the web of the English Criminal Law, the golden thread is always to be seen, that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner‘s guilt – if at the end of and on the whole of the case, there is a reasonable doubt, created by the evidence given by either the prosecution or the prisoner – the prosecution has not made out the case and the prisoner is entitled to an acquittal. No matter what the charge or where the trial, the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common law of England and no attempt to whittle it down can be entertained.‖ See the case of: *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 4 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* Commissioner of Police Vrs Isaac Antwi [1961] GLR 408 where the Woolmington principle was applied. 7. In the case of Lutterodt vrs C. O. P. [1963] 2GLR 429 holding 3 sets out 3 stages that a court must use to examine the case of the defence in criminal cases, as follows: (3) ―In all criminal cases where the determination of a case depends upon facts and the court forms the opinion that a prima facie case has been made, the court should proceed to examine the case for the defence in three stages: a) If the explanation of the defence is acceptable, then the accused should be acquitted, b) If the explanation is not acceptable but is reasonably probable, the accused should be acquitted. c) If quite apart from the defence‘s explanation, the court is satisfied on a consideration of the whole evidence that the accused is guilty it must convict.‖ This is often referred to as the three tier test. 8. See also the following cases on the burden of proof in criminal cases: Frimpong @Iboman v The Republic [2012] 1 SCGLR 297, Gligah & Anr v The Republic [2010] SCGLR 870, Tetteh v The Republic [2001-2002] SCGLR 854, Francis Yirenkyi v Republic [2017-2020] 1 SCGLR 433 at 457 and 464-466, just to mention a few. The Ingredients of the Offence of Assault, Evaluation of Evidence and Legal Analysis 9. Offence of Assault is governed by sections 84 to 88 of Act 29. Section 84 creates the offence of Assault and makes it a misdemeanor. Section 85 makes provision for different kinds of Assault whiles sections 86 to 88 provide for the definitions of the different kinds of Assault. Section 84, 85 and 86(1) of Act 29 provides as follows: *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 5 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* Section 84- ―A person who unlawfully assaults another person commits a misdemeanor”. Section 85- (1) "Assault" includes—(a) assault and battery; (b) assault without actual battery; and (c) imprisonment. (2) Every assault is unlawful unless it is justified on one of the grounds mentioned in Chapter 1 of this Part. Section 86(1)- ―A person makes an assault and battery upon another person, if without the other person's consent, and with the intention of causing harm, pain, or fear, or annoyance to the other person, or of exciting him to anger, he forcibly touches the other person, or causes any person, animal, or matter to forcibly touch him.‖ In the case of Asante vrs. The Republic [1972] 2 GLR 177, it was held that Proof of the assault must be established by evidence of conduct of the accused as falling within one or other of the definitions of assault in sections 86, 87 and 88 of Act 29. From the above-mentioned authorities on assault, the following elements of the offence must be established: a. Wrongful Act/ Actus Reus -The wrongful act or prohibited physical act is unpermitted contact without consent. In other words, once the contact is unpermitted, there is notional forcibility. The requirement of “forcible touching” in section 86(1) does not mean that the contact should have been done vigorously or violently. “Forcible touching” looks to the lack of consent. b. Mental Element/Mens Rea- The required mental element, mens rea, is intentional conduct. In the case of assault of battery, the conduct must be with the intention of causing harm, pain, or fear, or annoyance to the person assaulted or exciting him to anger. Thus, the intentional conduct was done without the consent of the complainant. *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 6 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* Conduct complained about should be Unjustifiable under law. 10. Section 85 (2) provides that “An assault is unlawful unless it is justified on one of the grounds mentioned in Chapter One of this part‖ From this provision or section 85 (2) of Act 29 the prosecution ought to adduce evidence to establish that the conduct of the accused person is not justified under law. The forcible touching complained about should be unlawful in the sense that the conduct did not fall within one of the grounds recognized under the law as justifying the use of force. The chapter one referred in section 85 (2) is made up of Section 30 to Section 45 as the grounds for the justification of the use of force. See the case of Asante v. The Republic [1972] 2 GLR 177. Sections 31 and 38 of Chapter one of Part two of Act 29 provides as follows: “31. Grounds on which force or harm is justified- Force may be justified in the case and in the manner, and subject to the conditions, provided for in this Chapter, on the grounds (a) of express authority given by an enactment; or (b) of authority to execute the lawful sentence or order of a Court; or (c) of the authority of an officer to keep the peace or of a Court to preserve order; or (d) of an authority to arrest and detain for felony; or (e) of an authority to arrest, detain, or search a person otherwise than for felony; or (f) of a necessity for the prevention of or defence against a criminal offence; or (g) of a necessity for defence of property or possession or for overcoming the obstruction to the exercise of lawful rights; or (h) of a necessity for preserving order on board a vessel; or (i) of an authority to correct a child, servant, or other similar person, for misconduct; or (j) of the consent of the person against whom the force is used. 38. Unlawful fights- (1) A force used in an unlawful fight cannot be justified under a provision of this Act. (2) A fight is an unlawful fight in which a person engages, or maintains, otherwise than solely in pursuance of a matter of justification specified in this Chapter. *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 7 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* 11. In the instant case, it is the prosecution's case that the accused person on 02/02/2022 and 14/08/2022 assaulted the complainant by slapping, pressing her neck and dragging her on the floor. Prosecution in bid to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt called three witnesses. PW1-Martha Teng Abbey (Complainant) testified that “on 03/02/2022 about 7:00am the accused person attacked and subjected me to severe beatings by slapping and squeezing my throat without any provocation. I informed my senior brother and I later reported the matter to police. My statement was then taken and I was issued with a police medical form to go to hospital for treatment and endorsement. I went to Bolgatanga Regional Hospital where I was examined, treated and discharged on medication by the Doctor on duty and submitted his report. I returned the medical form and handed it over to the investigator for further action. The accused was later arrested and we were paraded before the station officer. She advised that we should go home and live in peace whilst she monitors further development and take exercise on the matter. Both of us have been reporting at the station periodically while investigations were ongoing. On 14/08/2022, about 9:30pm the accused again attacked me and subjected me to severe beating by slapping, squeezing my neck and forcibly dragging interested in me together with our two children. Later the same night, I went through severe pains to the extent that the prosecution witness rushed me to the Bolgatanga Regional Hospital where the Doctor instructed I made a compliant that shows that I was assaulted to enable him write his report. My brother took me back to the police station where I made a formal complaint and I was issued with a police medical report form. I was treated that night at the Hospital and discharged on medication. The following day, I returned to the police station and gave my statement to the police together with my brother. I also handed over the endorsed medical form to the investigator same day.” 12. PW2-Joshua Teng Abbey testified that “on 03/02/2022 about 9:30 am I was with my mother in the house when my Sister came and told me that she was attacked and beaten by the accused person, I asked her to report the matter to the police for investigation. After some days I asked my sister the progress of the matter and she told me the matter was under investigation. After some *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 8 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* months, I was in the house with my mother on 14/08/2022 about 9:30 pm the accused brought my sister together with the children and told us that he is no longer interested in her so he brought her back, I did not say anything, I gave them a place to sleep. Later same night, my sister makes complaints of severe headache, pains in the ear and a general discomfort as a result of the beating she received from the accused person. About 12:47 am, on 15/08/2022, I rushed her to the Bolgatanga Regional Hospital for checkup. The Doctor on duty instructed that my sister should go for a police medical report form before he would attend to her. I took my sister to the police station where she was issued with the police medical form after which we returned to the Hospital where she was treated and discharged on medication. We returned to the police station later where my sister and I gave statements to police and also handed over the endorsed police medical form.” 13. PW3-No.46148D/CPL King Edem Adzagbo testified that “on 3/02/2022, complainant came to Unit and reported that she was subjected to severe beating by the accused person on 03/02/22 about 7:00am. I obtained statement from the complainant and issued her with police medical form to attend hospital for medical examination, treatment and endorsement. The complainant returned the form from Bolgatanga Regional Hospital duly endorsed by a medical officer and he submitted his written report to that effect. The accused was arrested on 07/02/20222 and his caution statement was given to police in which he admitted the offence. Whilst investigations were ongoing, on 15/08/2022 complainant came to the unit and reported that on 14/08/2022 about 8:30 pm she was attacked and subjected to beatings by the accused person. As if that not enough, the accused person forcibly dragged her into his car with her together with their 2 children and dumped them at her mother. I obtained statement from the complainant and issued her with a police medical report form. I also obtained a witness statement from Joshua Teng Abbey. The complainant returned the police medical form duly endorsed by a medical officer of Bolgatanga Regional and submitted his report. The suspect again was arrested and cautioned. In his statement, he admitted forcibly dragging the complainant and their 2 children into his car *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 9 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* and subsequently dumping them in her mother’s house. I also obtained charged statement from the accused person in the presence of an independent witness.” He tendered in evidence the caution statement the accused person as Exhibits A and A1 respectively. The Medical reports as Exhibits B and B1 respectively, the charged statement as Exhibit C, Photographs of the complainant as at the time of the assault as Exhibits D and D1. 14. Charles Bugbila (Accused person) in his defence testified himself and called one witness. He testified that as follows: “on 2nd February 2022, I got home from work and realized that our son was injured as a result of riding a bicycle. I noticed that night that there were bruises on his leg and asked that the complainant takes him to hospital the following day. She did not do so until 4th February 2022. On 4th February, 2022, while I was preparing breakfast, the complainant received a phone call from a pastor regarding our child’s leg after the call; I asked her why she kept informing her pastor and family about everything going on in our marriage. Her reply was that I can never ever tell her what to do. As a usual play I spanked her buttocks and she started beating and hitting me with objects in the kitchen. I did not but walked out from the kitchen. It is not true that on the 03/02/2022. I subjected the complainant to severe beatings as alleged by the police investigator and the complainant. I did not also admit to have assaulted the complainant to severe beatings as alleged by the police investigating officer. The allegation that the complainant and the two children were forcibly dragged into my car and dumped at her mother’s house is not true. I did not beat the complainant on the 03/02/2022 neither did I squeeze her neck as alleged by the complainant. It is also not true that the complainant and I have been reporting to the police station periodically while investigations were ongoing. It is never true that on the 14 /08/2022 I attacked the complainant and subjected her to sever beating by slapping, squeezing her neck and forcibly dragging her on the floor to a car and dumping her with the children at her mother’s house as alleged by the complainant. My brother Alex and the wife were present on that 14/08/2022 but he is currently in school in Sunyani. I deny the statement made by Joshua Teng Abbey to the effect that *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 10 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* his sister (the complainant) told him that I assaulted her when he was not present. It is also not true that I said I was not interested in marrying the complaint as alleged by Joshua Teng Abbey. The pictures presented to the honorable court on the 25/07/2023 are pictures that were taken from a motor accident the complainant had in 2020 and has no relation to this case.” 15. DW1-Abugbila Alexander testified that “on the evening of 14/08/2022. I was in my apartment with my wife when I heard the accused son crying outside the house at about 8:40pm. I quickly rushed outside to check because it was an unusual thing for the kids to be outside at that time. To my surprise my brother had opened the car boot and was packing some of his wife’s belonging in it. I asked what the problem was and he said his wife denies him sex and does not respect him and he was angry and could not spend that night with her under the same roof and that he was taking her to her mother. He added that when tempers calm they can resolve the issue. I asked my brother to calm down and take the things loaded in the car back so that we could sit and resolve it. I then went to talk to his wife, Martha (Complainant) who was at the veranda making a call. I tried talking to her but she would not mind me and was talking to someone on phone and making statements like “I will lock you up, foolish boy‖ I asked her why she has an issue and would not come to me but prefers to call outsiders but she did not still mind me. I called my wife to come and take their kids to our apartment so that I will talk to both of them since it was not the best for the kids to be seeing what was happening. The complainant rushed to my room and asked that I bring the kids out and that I had no right to lake the kids and if I wanted some I should also give birth. I tried to explain the motive behind my decision of sending them to my room but she would not hear me out. I was present on the 14/08/2022 misunderstanding between the accused and the complainant but I was not present on 02/02/2022 misunderstanding. My brother then asked her to enter the car and she did and he drove the complainant to her parents’ house. I took my bike in pursuit of my brother to stop him but could not meet him. I traced them to the complainant’s house but got there ate when he had already reached Tanzui (complainant mother’s house).” *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 11 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* 16. Accused person in his statement to the police which is in his hand writing (Exhibit A, relied on in Exhibit C) dated 07/02/2022 stated as follows: ―I asked her why she had to inform her Pastor or tell the pastor and her extended family of every minor problem or issues in our marriage or family. She replied that I cannot and can never ever tell her what to do. She cannot live in an abusive marriage. I told her what the abuse was about because I do not understand why everything in my marriage home has to be carried out. We exchanged words and out of anger I slapped her and she started beating me and hitting me with objects.” 17. Also, the Accused person in his statement to the police which is in his hand writing (Exhibit A1, relied on in Exhibit C) dated 15/08/2022 stated as follows: “Yesterday I used one of the new silver sets to cook my food and when I got home back from work and wanted to heat water for tea, I realized she had packed all the silver away. After confronting her why she did that she told me to go and wash the big pot and use. I did not say a word, all I did was to pack her things and pulled her outside to take her back to her family house because for almost three (3) years, I have been going through emotional abuse from my wife and I am no longer interested in the marriage.‖ 18. From the evidence of the prosecution and the defence on record, this court finds as a fact as follows: The Complainant and the Accused person are husband and wife with two children. That on 02/02/2022 and 15/08/2022 there was a misunderstanding between the complainant and the accused person. The complainant and the accused person fought or exchanged words, in the process the accused slapped the complainant, and the complainant sustained some minor injuries. The accused also packed the complainant things, pulled her into his car in the night and sent her together with the children to the complainant’s family house at Tanzui-Bolgatanga. In other words, the court finds as a fact that the complainant and the accused person engaged in unlawful fight. *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 12 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* 19. It must be noted that the misunderstanding between the accused and the complainant could have been resolved without a fight. The accused admitted slapping the complainant or pulling her into his car. This was obviously done without the consent of the complainant. This court is unable to believe the accused person’s story that he did not assault or beat the complainant. On the contrary, the accused stated categorically in his Caution Statement and Caution Statement (thus, Exhibits A, A1 and C respectively) as quoted above that he slapped the complainant. He also stated in the said statements that he pulled the complainant into his car. The Caution Statement and the Charge Statement were admitted in evidence without objections. 20. The inference that can be made is that the slapping and pulling of the complainant into the car were done intentionally without consent of the complainant. The law is that a person who without the consent of another person and with the intention of causing harm, pain or fear or annoyance to the person or exciting the person to anger or that person forcibly touches the other person commits an assault and battery. See section 86(1) of Act 29. The least touch of a person in anger to cause pain, harm, fear, or annoyance to that person or of exciting the other person to anger that person forcibly touches the person amounts to Assault and battery. The conduct of Accused person in slapping and pulling or beating the complainant in the instant case is intended to cause harm, pain, or fear, or annoyance to the complainant or exciting her to anger. In other words, the accused by his conduct unlawfully assaulted the complainant. 21. Besides, it is noteworthy that the Accused and the Complainant were engaged in unlawful fight. The law is that a force used in an unlawful fight cannot be justified under the provisions of Act 29. See section 38 of Act 29 supra. Also the explanation of the accused person do not falls within the grounds on which force or harm is justified as provided for under Act 29. 22. Moreover, there is a clear contradiction between the Accused statements in Exhibits A, A1 and C as well as Accused evidence in court. Thus the *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 13 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* accused testified that he did not assault the complainant but spanked her buttons and he did not drag the complainant into his car but in Exhibits A, A1 and C he admitted slapping the complainant or pulling her into car and sent her and the children to complainant mother’s house. 23. Under section 80 of the Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323), matters which the court may take into consideration in determining the credibility of a witness include a statement or conduct which is consistent or inconsistent with the testimony of the witness at the trial. The law is well settled that a person whose evidence on oath was contradictory of a previous statement made by him, whether sworn or unsworn, was not worthy of credit. Thus, in the case of Odupong v Republic [1992-93] GBR 1038 the Court of Appeal held on this principle as follows:- ―The law was well settled that a person whose evidence on oath was contradictory of a previous statement made by him, whether sworn or unsworn, was not worthy of credit and his evidence would be of no probative value unless he gave a reasonable explanation for the contradiction.‖ See also Gyabaah v Republic [1984-86] 2 GLR 416 and Kuo-den alias Sobti v Republic [1989-90] 2 GLR 203 SC were referred to. 24. The inconsistencies in Exhibits A, A1 and C as well as the evidence of Accused person in court lead to the irresistible conclusion that he is not a credible person and his evidence is to be taken with a pinch of salt. The court finds the explanation of the defence unacceptable and holds that the accused person assaulted the complainant by slapping, pressing her next and dragging or pulling her into his car. Accordingly, the prosecution has proved to the satisfaction of this court that the accused person assaulted the complainant without her consent or any justification in law. Conclusion 25. Having examined the whole evidence of the prosecution and Defence on record, this court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution has *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 14 of 15 *HWMNJ@DC/B--27/10/2023* discharged its burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt regarding the charge of Assault against the accused person. Thus, the ingredients of the offence of Assault were proved beyond reasonable doubt. In other words, apart from the defence’s explanation, this court is satisfied on a consideration of the whole evidence that the accused is guilty of unlawfully assaulting the complainant. Accordingly, the accused person is hereby found guilty of Assault contrary to section 84 of the Criminal and Other Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29). The accused person is convicted for the crime of Assault contrary to section 84 of Act 29. Mitigation of sentence 26. The Accused Person pleaded for leniency and that the court should temper justice with mercy. He submitted that he is a first time offender. Sentence 27. The practice where men beat or assault their wives or women when there is a misunderstanding between them should not be countenanced. So a punishment that will deter other like-minded men in engaging in similar act or conduct must be imposed. And now therefore, considering the nature or facts of this case, the plea of the accused person for mercy or leniency, the fact that the accused person is a first time offender, the Accused person is hereby sentenced to pay a fine of One Hundred and Fifty (150) Penalty Units (GHC1,800.00) and in default Seven (7) months imprisonment with hard labour for each counts one and two. The sentence is to run concurrently. It is further ordered that the accused person shall pay the sum of Two Thousand Ghana Cedis (GHC2,000.00) to the complainant as a compensation for assaulting her. (SDG.) H/W MAWUKOENYA NUTEKPOR (DISTRICT MAGISTRATE) *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. CHARLES BUGBILA (CASE NO. B4/2/2023)* Page 15 of 15