DONKOR ALIAS BOATENG vs. THE REPUBLIC [1977]DLHC1309

Date	1977-07-16
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1977]DLHC1309

OSEI-HWERE J.

GYAMBRAH FOR THE APPELLANT.

AGBANU SENIOR STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE REPUBLIC.

[1977]DLHC1309
																																						<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" >DONKOR ALIAS BOATENG <o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;THE REPUBLIC <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, SUNYANI]<o:p></o:p>[1977] 2 GLR 49<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE:
16 JULY 1976<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">

GYAMBRAH FOR THE APPELLANT.<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">

OSEI-HWERE J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF OSEI-HWERE J.<o:p></o:p>The
appellant was arraigned and tried before the Circuit Court, Sunyani, on two
counts for smuggling contrary to section 49 (1) (e) of the Customs and Excise
Decree, 1972 (N.R.C.D. 114). The particulars of the first count disclosed that
on or about 17 June 1974, at Sunyani the appellant with intent to defraud the
Republic of customs duty was concerned in concealing prohibited goods, namely,
124 pieces of 720 Afro wigs. The particulars of the second count also showed
that the appellant, on the same date and at the same place and with the same
intent was concerned in concealing restricted goods, namely, fifteen packets
containing 90 T shirts. The appellant was found guilty by the trial circuit
judge who convicted her on each count and sentenced her to a fine of ¢5,000.00
or five years’ imprisonment with hard labour on each count with an order that
the fines be non-cumulative and the sentences concurrent. He further made the
following order:<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">“The 124
wigs and 90 T shirts are hereby forfeited. It is hereby directed that the registrar
of this court and the senior police officer in charge of the court should
arrange for the sale, and a certificate as to the sale be issued and filed in
the record book. The proceeds of sale should be paid to government chest.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appellant has appealed against the said conviction and sentence on only one
ground, viz. “The prosecution was not able to prove the case against the
accused person as required in a criminal prosecution.”<o:p></o:p>The case
for the prosecution against the appellant, briefly, was that on the named date
a police driver called Emmanuel Kwadwo Koranteng, the first prosecution witness
was on his way to the Sunyani lorry park. He saw a boy, the second prosecution
witness pulling a truck which carried a basket and a handbag. He challenged the
boy as to the ownership of the basket and the handbag and he said the owner was
at the market. The appellant came to the scene and claimed ownership of them
and she further told him that the basket contained salted fish. The first
prosecution witness held the basket and found it to be lightly weighted and so
he asked the appellant to follow the truck to the police station where the
contents of the basket would be examined. The appellant started to beg him and
so he suspected that the basket did not contain salted fish and he insisted
that she should go to the police station with him. At this stage the appellant
said she had left her child in front of a shop and asked that she should be
allowed to fetch it. The first prosecution witness allowed her request but as
the appellant was not coming after waiting for some time he asked the boy to
pull the truck along in his company to the police station. As soon as they got
to the police station the appellant also arrived there in a taxi. The first
prosecution witness made a report. In the presence of the appellant, the
contents of the basket were examined and revealed that under the top layer of
fish were ten packets of T shirts which were made in China as well as 124
pieces of 720 Afro wigs made in Hong Kong. The handbag also revealed five
packets of T shirts. The appellant was asked how she came by the goods and she
said, she brought them from Takoradi and she was taking them to Dormaa-Ahenkro.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appellant denied the charges. Her defence was that she had arrived that day on
a lorry at the Sunyani lorry park with two bags. When she alighted from the
lorry she went to a kiosk to get some water for her baby as the luggage was
being loaded off the canopy. The mate loaded the luggage on a truck. She came
back to inquire after her luggage but she saw that the truck with the luggage
had been pulled to some distance and she, therefore, went there to collect her
bag. She saw the first prosecution witness standing by the truck. She knew him
previously but she did not know he was a policeman. There were many people
standing by the truck. The first prosecution witness refused to allow her to
fetch her bag from the truck as he said that he was taking all the luggage to
the police station and he asked all of them to follow him there to collect
their luggage. She went back to the lorry to fetch her smaller bag and on her
return she could not see the first prosecution witness and so she followed him
up in a taxi to the Regional Criminal Investigation Department, Sunyani, where
she claimed the handbag, exhibit D as hers. Exhibit D was examined by the first
prosecution witness and he found it to contain only some articles of her
personal clothing. The first prosecution witness conducted the examination in
the presence of the fourth prosecution witness, a detective inspector, and the
fifth prosecution witness, an assistant superintendent of police. As nothing
incriminating was found in exhibit D, it was handed back to her. She was
questioned about the basket, exhibit C but she denied ownership of it. She was
taken to Asuhyiae, whence she had travelled to Sunyani, and there her house was
searched without discovering anything incriminating.<o:p></o</main>