EUNICE ADU vs. THE REPUBLIC

The appellant, Eunice Adu, was jointly tried with Patrick Kodua before the Madina District Court. She was charged with one count of stealing contrary to section 124(1) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29) and four counts of forgery of other document contrary to section 159 of Act 29. The prosecution case was that the complainant, PW1, Martin Acheampong Danquah, who was the appellant’s former husband, discovered that his land title certificate for property at East Legon was missing. Investigations later revealed that the certificate had allegedly been used by the appellant as collateral to secure a US$150,000 loan for Travel Bureau Ltd from Stanbic Bank, together with documents said to bear forged signatures of PW1. PW1 denied authorising the use of the certificate and denied signing the relevant loan and security documents. The Court of Appeal held that the prosecution evidence, including PW1’s testimony and corroborative evidence from PW3, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case requiring the appellant to open her defence. Portion relied on: the section headed “Facts of the case” and the later discussion on the stealing and forgery counts.