REPUBLIC VRS GADUGAH (B1/55/2024) [2024] GHADC 311 (26 February 2024)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT SEGE ON THURSDAY THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024. BEFORE HER WORSHIP VICTORIA AKUA GHANSAH ESQ. AS MAGISTRATE. CASE NO. B1/10/2024 THE REPUBLIC VRS PROSPER GADUGAH JUDGMENT A. On 11th day of January, 2024 the Accused persons were arraigned before this court on charge of steal and stealing contrary to section 124(1) respectively of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29). The accused person pleaded not guilty to the charge. B. BRIEF FACTS The briefs of the case are that the Complainant Samuel Otsiepeku a farmer and a trader of Goi and Kpotsum. On the 8th day of January 2024 at about 2anthe Complainant woke up and detected that thieves have caused damage to his room lock and stole his king size mattress. The Complainant gave information to the town people about the theft in his room. A witness in the case told the complainant he saw accused with a mattress going to Tudizah Sikanortey’s house at Amamorkope. 1 ON same day the Complainant lodged complaint with the Sege Police and led the Police to the house of Tudizah Sikanortey where a search was conducted in his room and the mattress of the Complainant was found. Tudizah Sikanortey told Police it was the Accused Prosper Gadugah who came to keep the mattress in his room that he was sending it to Goi and their car broke down. Tudizah Sikanortey led Police to the house of Accused at Kpotsum and he was arrested. C. Accused upon his arraignment before this court pleaded not guilty to the count. By this plea Prosper Gadugah put himself in charge of the court, meaning that his guilt has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. That common law rule that a person was presumed innocent until the contrary was proved or he pleaded guilty is reinforced by Article 19(2) (c) of the 1992 Constitution which enacts: “(2) A person charged with a criminal offence shall ------- (c) be presumed to be innocent until he is proved or has pleaded guilty.” The mandatory requirement that the guilt of the person charged ought to be established beyond reasonable doubt and the burden of persuasion on the party claiming that a person was guilty, has been provided for in Ss 13 and 15 of the Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323). Significantly, whereas the Prosecution carries that burden to prove the guilt of the Accused beyond reasonable doubt, there is no such burden on him to prove his innocence. At best he can only raise a doubt in the case of the Prosecution. But the doubt must be real and not fanciful. Prosecution in proving their case called two (2) witnesses including the investigator. PW1 is Number 45684D/SGT Narzah Nashiru Stationed at Sege CID. According to PW1 a case of stealing was referred to him for investigation on the 8th day of January 2024. He took statement from the Complainant. the Complainant led Police to a 2 house at Akplabanya -Anyamam curve and to a house. The king size mattress was found in one Tudiza Sikanortey’s room. Tudizah mentioned Accused Prosper Gadugah as the one who came and left the mattress in his room. Accused was arrested for investigation. PW1 stated further that the Accused in his statement told Police that he picked the mattress at the seashore at Goi when he was coming from the beach on the 08/01/24 at about 4am. During cross examination the Accused asked the following questions; Q. Why did you state that I stole the mattress. A. The complainant kept the mattress in his room where he parked other things. The mattress was stolen from his room. During investigation the mattress was in the witness room and he it was you accused who kept it there. He led police to your arrest and you admitted that you sent it there. Q. What did Tudizah tell you. A. Tudizah told me you kept the mattress in his room. PW2 is Samuel Otipeseku is the Complainant. In his evidence in chief before the court he woke up on the day of the incident and realised the padlocks to one of the rooms was broken. After he entered the room, he detected that his king size mattress valued at GH2000.00 was missing .PW2 later got information that the mattress was in someone’s room. PW3 is TUDIZA SIKANORTEY a Herbalist at Asinyekope-Akplabanya. In his evidence in chief before the court PW3 stated that the Accused on the 8th day of January 2024 at about 4am he was asleep when the Accused and another brought a mattress to him to keep in his room for them. According to PW3 Accused told him they were in a car going to Goi but the car developed a mechanical fault. Accused did not come back for the mattress and he was arrested in the evening by the police. 3 In opening his defence the Accused Prosper Gadugah stated One Sunday he went to the beach, Lolonya. It was around 1:00am. He and a certain lady (Vida) whom he met at Lolonya. they were walking to Goi on their way back to Lolonya. Accused realized he had left his phone behind. Accused further stated that he saw the mattress at the sea side. He took the mattress to Anyamam for safe keeping at one of his friend’s house so that the following morning they will make announcement for collection. The following day was Monday. Accused could not go to my friend’s house to make the announcement. In the evening around 6pm, had a call from Police officer (Nashiru). When I got to the police station, I was arrested and detained. Prosecution informed court that the Accused was convicted by this court on the 7th day of March 2024 In the offence of stealing Motorbike. He was sentenced to pay a fine of 200 penalty unit in default 12 months prison terms. The court to notice of the fact that the accused was a known in the same offence of stealing. After his mitigation he was sentence to eight (8) prison terms without the option of a fine. The reason for the court’s decision is to serve as a deterrent for other prospective offenders. (SGD) H/W VICTORIA AKUA GHANSAH MAGISTRATE 4