<p class="mb-5" id="contentDlCitation" hidden>[1967]DLCA10245</p> <div class="restriction-wrapper"> <div class="container-lg"> <div class="row"> <div class="col-md-12 restricted-content"> <div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper"> <div class="lock-icon bounce-7"> <img class="" src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png" alt="Subscription based content"> </div> </div> <a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login" class="btn btn-primary btn-lg" style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> Login to Read Full Case </a> </div> </div> </div> </div> <main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size: 18px !important;"><p class="MsoNormalCxSpFirst" align="center" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;line-height: 150%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:150%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;color:#00B0F0">BISSAH</span></b><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; mso-fareast-font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:#00B0F0"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;line-height: 150%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom: .0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;line-height:150%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 150%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;color:#00B0F0">THE STATE<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom: .0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;line-height:150%"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;"> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom: .0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;line-height:150%;border:none; mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">G B R 310 - 318 DATE: 12TH MAY, 1967<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormalCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;line-height:150%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">B. J. DA ROCHA FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">K. GYEKE-DAKO, PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEY, FOR THE RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space: auto;text-align:justify;line-height:150%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:150%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">CORAM: <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">OLLENNU J.A, AZU CRABBE J.A, LASSEY J.A.<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> </span></p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;border:none; mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Book Antiqua",serif">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> </div><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> </span></u></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">AZU CRABBE J. A.<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> </span></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">Azu Crabbe J.A. delivered the judgment of the court. The appellant was convicted in the High Court, Ho, on 18 October 1965, before Sowah J. sitting with a jury, for the murder of one Emmanuel Kodjoe Agbobli at Ativi Cottage in the Volta Region on 31 October 1963. That the deceased died from gun shot wounds was not disputed, and according to the doctor who performed the post-mortem examination, the shots must have been fired from the right side of the deceased and were at close range. The events out of which the charge arose relate to land litigation between the Chief of Dapaa, Nana Kwaku Gyampoh III and the appellant, the Omanhene of Dodo Amanfro. On 17 July 1962, Nana Gyampoh III obtained judgment in a case, and the appellant, having appealed from that judgment to the Supreme Court, applied to that court on 3 March 1963, for an interim injunction, and for the appointment of a receiver and manager. The appellant's application was granted, and Mr. E. S. Jeffrey, then the High Court registrar at Ho, was appointed receiver and manager of the proceeds accruing from the disputed area. Mr. Jeffrey in turn appointed as his agent one Kwadade the first prosecution witness, and instructed both contending parties to [p.312] appoint three persons each to assist his agent in the performance of his duties. The appellant at first expressed dissatisfaction with the appointment of Kwadade, but later he made his nominations. Nana Gyampoh III also nominated three persons, including the deceased. On 8 October 1963, Kwadade and the deceased were summoned to the house of the appellant, and after the appellant had remonstrated with Kwadade for operating outside the area prescribed in the order of the Supreme Court, the appellant further told him in a fit of anger that if he did not restrict himself to the court's order he would be opposed by his (appellant's) group. The Mankrado of the appellant was alleged to have threatened to shoot Kwadade and Nana Gyampoh's men down "like monkeys." On 31 October 1963, Kwadade, accompanied by the deceased, one Achiampong the second prosecution witness and also Onima the eleventh prosecution witness as well as other prosecution witnesses, went to Ativi Cottage where they met the appellant and other persons. Kwadade informed the people in the cottage that they had come there in pursuance of the court's order. The appellant told Kwadade and his men that the area in which they were was not included in the order of the court and that he was willing to show them the proper boundaries. But Kwadade would not agree to this suggestion. The appellant then left the cottage. Realising the hostile attitude of the appellant, Kwadade sent for police protection and also for one Ackumey, the sixteenth prosecution witness, to take photographs. The appellant soon returned to the cottage accompanied by his driver, one George Mensah, and there was a heated altercation between the appellant and Kwadade and his men. The appellant then left the cottage again in an angry mood. Some time later the appellant returned to the cottage for the third time holding a cutlass and saw Kwadade, the deceased and other labourers collecting cocoa. The appellant asked them to stop the collection, but Kwadade gave no heed, and told the labourers to go ahead with their work. Then the appellant raised his cutlass over his head and as soon as he brought it down there was the report of a gun. Kwadade who was sitting on a wall was hit by pellets from the gun, and was grievously injured. The rest of the people present ran helter-skelter, and according to the evidence of Achiampong and Onima they both ran in the same direction, with the deceased running at a certain distance to the right of Achiampong, and Onima on his left side. Achiampong testified that as they were running he turned back and saw the appellant running after them, but that he (appellant) was nearer to the deceased. He shouted and informed the deceased of the nearness of the appellant, and as the deceased turned to see he was shot by the appellant. Onima also gave similar evidence, describing [p.313] their running formation, and how the shot was fired by the appellant. Both Achiampong and Onima said that they ran to Dapaa and informed the Dapaahene, Nana Kwaku Gyampoh III, who took them to the police station. The evidence of the prosecution that the appellant was the killer of the deceased was based substantially on the evidence of Achiampong and Onima. There was also the evidence of Kwadade who said that after the first shooting he saw the labourers running and the appellant chasing the deceased.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> </span></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">The appellant denied that he ever fired a gun on that day, and said that the evidence of Achiampong and Onima was a fabrication by these two witnesses to get him into trouble. He said that after the shooting at Ativi Cottage he ran away to his house, changed himself, and went to the police station, where he made a report. The police inspector in charge of Dodi Papase, the fifth prosecution witness, said that on the day of the incident at about 2.30 p.m. the appellant came to the police station and made a report. He said that the appellant reported that whilst Kwadade and his men were trying to collect his cocoa and he in turn was trying to stop them, somebody from the outskirts of the cottage shot at them, and that those in the cottage ran away, and he also ran away. The inspector said he thereupon detained the appellant, and then went to the scene of the crime. An escort police sergeant who gave evidence for the prosecution said that at about 2 p.m. on that day, whilst he was on patrol duty some distance from Ativi Cottage, one Jatto Zabrama made a report to him, and as a result he proceeded to Ativi Cottage. He was there when the inspector from Dodi Papase arrived and they found the dead body of the deceased. Jatto Zabrama did not give evidence.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> </span></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">There is no evidence by any of th</main>
