REPUBLIC VRS MOHAMMED (UE/BG/CT/B7/02/2023.) [2023] GHACC 1075 (31 March 2023)

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT HELD AT BOLGATANGA IN THE UPPER EAST REGION OF GHANA ON TUESDAY THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2023 BEFORE HIS HONOUR SUMAILA MBACHE AHMADU (CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE). CASE NO. UE/BG/CT/B7/02/2023. THE REPUBLIC VRS ISSAKA MOHAMMED JUDGMENT The Accused is charged with Robbery; contrary to section 149 of the criminal and other offences Act 1960[ACT 29]. THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTION. On 20/07/2022 at about 21:30 hours, the complainant rode his unregistered Apsonic Aloba motorbike with chassis no. LD3PCT6J8M167-6137 in the company Maxwell Donzor to his house at Accra mining site. The complainant on his return and on reaching a section of the road towards the Tarkwa mining site, was attacked by the accused person wielding a cutlass and his accomplice also wielding a locally made pistol as he slowed to ride through a valley. The Accused person after attacking the complainant ordered him to surrender the ignition key to his motorbike and thereafter ordered him to lie on the ground in the a prone position beside three other victims. On 21/07/2022, the complainant lodged a complaint to the police. Investigations disclosed that,pw2; victim Nabilla Bugre; was also robbed by the accused person and his accomplice same day of his keypad mobile phone valued GH₵ 150 and cash of GH₵ 40 at the same spot. PW2; Nabilla Bugre and the complainant during the attack, recognized the accused person but obliged to his orders without resistance. The accused 1 person and his accomplice after executing their robbery attack, released PW2 motorbike to him since it was old and ordered them to go home but rode off with the complainant motorbike. On 22/07/2022 about 9:30 hours, the complainant spotted the accused person in the Degaare village and attempt to arrest him, he rode off on a motorbike towards his farm. Complainant with the help of some neighbors, pursued the accused person and arrested him and later handed him over to the police. On 30/07/2022, the accused person led police to his house at Accra mining site and a cutlass was recovered during a search in his presence. The complainant later identified the cutlass as what the accused used during the attacked. The prosecution called four witnesses, Pw1 says he was robbed of the motorbike belonging to Pw2 on his return to the Accra mining site after dropping off Pw2 by the accused person and his accomplice with use of a cutlass and a locally manufactured pistol. That he identified the accused person at the scene of crime. That on the 22/07/2022 he caused the arrest of the accused person with the assistance of others and handed him over to the police. PW2 says he was called by Pw1 to inform him of the robbery and he together with PW1 and others went to the house of the accused to arrest him and handed him over to the police.PW3 says he was also robbed by the accuse person with his accomplice and that he identified the accused at the scene. PW4 tendered in evidence the cutlass used for the robbery by the accused and documents covering the stolen motorbike. THE CASE OF THE DEFENDANT. The accused person denied the charge and says that it was in the farming season and that he was on his farm with his father, mother and his brother farming when the 2 complainant and other people came to the farm and arrested him and he knows nothing about the robbery. BURDEN OF PROOF Section 11(2) AND (3) of NRCD323. (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 ELEMENTS / INGREDIENTS OF ROBBERY. The taking of the property of another. From his or her person or in their presence. By violence, intimidation or threat. With the intent to deprive them of it permanently. ANALYSIS AND APPLICATION OF THE LAW. From the evidence adduced before this court the complainant and PW3 who fell victim to the robbery said they identified the accused person at scene and they both identified him to the person wielding the cutlass and giving the orders. PW1 in paragraph 10 of his witness statement states; I recognized the accused person due to the close engagement I had with him, before he ordered me to lay on the ground. PW3 Nabila Bugre stated in paragraph 7 of his witness statement that; the other suspect who was holding the gun pointed a flash light at us due to which I saw the accused persons face as he also pointed a cutlass at me to surrender my motorbike and thereafter ordered us to lie on the ground in a prone position. 3 IN ADU BOAHENE V THE REPUBLIC [1972] 1GLR 70. The court states that; where the identity of an accused person is issue, there can be no better proof of his identity than the evidence of a witness who swears to have seen the accused committing the offence charged. Both victims swore that they saw the accused person and they both saw him to be the person with the cutlass in the instant case. In fact, the complainant knew the accused persons house leading to his arrest. I therefore find as a fact that, the accused person was the one seen wielding the cutlass and issuing the orders. More so the facts shows that both complainant and accused person are natives Degaare village and likelihood of they knowing is very high, even though they may not have known each other by names, the attempted escape of the accused person upon seeing the complainant attest to this view. The accused person in his defense says he was caught in the bush, because he was there farming with his family, but he refused to invite at least one of these family members that he was working so hard to feed, to give evidence in court. He politely decline the suggestion by the court to call them to give evidence in his favor. In my view it is either the accused person is in Degaare or their presence will make his worse. IN FROMPONG ALIAS IBOMAN V. THE REPUBLIC [2012]1SCGLR 297. The court states that , for the offense of robbery , it is important to establish the following ingredients: (a)That the appellant stole something from the victim of the robbery of which he is not the owner; (b)That in stealing the thing, the appellant used force, harm or threat of any criminal assault on the victims; (c)That the intention of doing so was to prevent or overcome the resistance;(d)That this fear of violence must either be personal violence to the person robbed or to any member of his household or family in a restrictive sense;(e) The thing stolen must be in the presence of the person threatened. In the instant case, in view of the overwhelming evidence against the accused person. I find that the prosecution has proved all the ingredients as contained in the case 4 mentioned supra, and I therefore convict the accused person as charged and sentence him to 15 years in Prison Custody. HIS HONOUR SUMAILA MBACHE AHMADU (CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE). 5