EKYINABA AND OTHERS vs. THE REPUBLIC [1979]DLHC1058

Date	1979-02-16
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1979]DLHC1058

ANSAH-TWUM J.

DR. TACKIE-OTOO FOR THE APPELLANTS.

MRS. OTOO STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1979]DLHC1058
																																						<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" >EKYINABA AND OTHERS <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, SEKONDI] <o:p></o:p>[1978] GLR 76<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 FEBRUARY 1979<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">

DR. TACKIE-OTOO FOR THE APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p>

MRS. OTOO, STATE ATTORNEY, FOR THE RESPONDENTS.<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 1.0pt 0in">

ANSAH-TWUM J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ANSAH-TWUM J.<o:p></o:p>The appellants
were convicted on 4 November 1977 by his worship I. Y. Buamah, Esq., on a
charge of forcible entry, and each of them was sentenced to a fine of ¢100, or
six months’ imprisonment with hard labour. The appeal is against the conviction
on the ground that the “conviction cannot be supported by the evidence adduced
at the trial.” There was an indication in the appellants’ petition of 4
November 1977 that additional grounds of appeal would be filed when the record
of proceedings had been obtained, but it appears the appellants considered the
only ground of appeal, referred to (supra) as sufficient, and learned counsel,
Dr. Tackie-Otoo, has therefore argued basically on this ground with some amount
of elaboration and emphasis.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The three
appellants were charged before the District Court Grade I, Sekondi, with the
offence of forcible entry contrary to section 202A (1) of the Criminal Code,
1960 (Act 29), as amended by the Criminal Code (Amendment) Decree, 1969
(N.L.C.D. 398). The particulars of the offence as set out are:<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">“Kofi
Ekyinaba, farmer, Kwesi Donkor, farmer, Anthony Kofie, driver’s mate, for that
you on 19 September 1976, at Apowa near Kwesimintsim in the Western Magisterial
District did enter a plot of land the property of one Kwabena Payne without
lawful excuse.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The facts
of this case upon which the appellants were charged and put before the trial
court, as summarised by the trial magistrate on p. 16 of the record of
proceedings were that: One Piedu (deceased), the complainant’s uncle, acquired a
piece of land from the chief of Prestea and cultivated it into a cocoa farm.
The complainant’s uncle, Piedu, died on or about 28 June 1976, and was
succeeded by the complainant , Kwabena Payne, the first prosecution witness.
While late Piedu was alive, he employed Samuel Kwabena Donkor, the second
prosecution witness, as his caretaker on the farm in question and, as the
evidence shows, the second prosecution witness, worked on the farm for Piedu as
such caretaker, for a period of about three years before Piedu died. The
complainant retained the second prosecution witness, as caretaker on the said
farm when he, the complainant, succeeded his late uncle, Piedu, and the second
prosecution witness was therefore in charge and in possession of the farm at
the time of the incident which gave rise to the complaint which culminated in
the charge preferred against the appellants.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
second prosecution witness as caretaker of the farm in question on visiting the
farm on 19 September 1976, met the appellants on the complainant’s farm
harvesting cocoa pods. The evidence is that when the second prosecution witness
questioned the first appellant as to what he was doing on the farm, the second
appellant asked the second prosecution witness to leave the farm otherwise he would
see what he did not like. The second prosecution witness left the farm and went
to the complainant and told him about the presence of the appellants on the
farm. The second prosecution witness accompanied by the complainant went to the
farm again. The complainant upon seeing the appellants on the farm himself
asked them what they were doing on his farm. It is the prosecution’s case that
the appellants drove the first and second prosecution witnesses out of the farm
with threats of violence and that led to the complaint which the first
prosecution witness lodged to the police and the subsequent arrest, and the
charge preferred against the appellants.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>A greater
part of the evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses does not seem to have
been seriously challenged by the appellants; only one of whom, the first
appellant, testified in this case. The learned trial magistrate seems to have
made the following findings, among other things, based on the evidence before
him:<o:p></o:p>