ZUTA II AND OTHERS vs. THE REPUBLIC [1975]DLHC457

Date	1975-12-19
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1975]DLHC457

LAMPTEY AG.J.

M. K. AYISI FOR THE APPELLANT.

MRS. GYAMPOH STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE REPUBLIC.

[1975]DLHC457
																																						<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" >ZUTA II AND OTHERS<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;vs. <o:p></o:p>THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1976] 1 GLR 136<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
19 DECEMBER 1975.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

M. K. AYISI FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

MRS. GYAMPOH, STATE ATTORNEY, FOR THE REPUBLIC.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

LAMPTEY AG.J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF LAMPTEY AG. J.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal by Nene Agbashie Zuta II for himself and on behalf of fourteen others
by way of petition which showeth as follows:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“(1) That
your petitioner was convicted by Moses Abakah, the magistrate at Tema, on 24
September 1973 for having on 18 December 1972 conducted themselves in a manner
prejudicial to public peace and order . . . and was sentenced to sign a bond to
be of good behaviour for twelve months . . .”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appeal was expressed to be made pursuant to section 326 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1960 (Act 30). It is pertinent at this stage to state the
provisions of section 326 of Act 30. It provides:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“326. (1)
Every appeal shall be made in the form of a petition in writing presented by
the appellant . . . and every such petition shall . . . be accompanied by a
copy of the judgment or order appealed against.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>At
paragraph 3 of the said petition appears the following matters:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“(3) That
your petitioner is aggrieved by the said conviction (or order) of the said
magistrate and humbly prays that he may appeal against such conviction (or
order) on the following grounds . . . <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(a) The
judgment is unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence
. . .”<o:p></o:p>It does
appear to me that the appellants as well as their counsel Mr. Ayisi labour
under the impression that what took place before Mr. Moses Abakah in the matter
of the Republic v. Nene Agbashie Zuta and Others, was a summary criminal trial
under Part III of Act 30. This is borne out by the use of such expressions as
“convicted” and “judgment” in the petition of the appellants. The use of the
words “convicted” and “judgment” is unfortunate for, having read through the
record of proceedings, I am satisfied beyond peradventure that the appellants
were never “convicted” by the learned district magistrate. I find also from the
record of proceedings that the learned trial magistrate never delivered a
“judgment.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In my
view the right to appeal is and can only be exercised by a person who is
convicted of any offence. That is why in presenting a petition on appeal it is
imperative that the appellant states the offence he is alleged to have
committed by reference to the statute creating the offence and the particular
section invoked by his accusers.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It is
evident from the record of proceedings that the learned trial magistrate
conducted an inquiry into a complaint properly made to him pursuant to section
22 of Act 30. The finding or decision of the learned trial magistrate was
delivered in what he described as a “ruling” and not as a “judgment” as the appellants
stated.<o:p</main>