AMOAH vs. THE REPUBLIC [1985]DLHC525

Date	1985-10-24
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1985]DLHC525

KPEGAH J.

F. E. OBENG FOR THE APPLICANT.

ADU MANTE FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1985]DLHC525
																																						<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" >AMOAH <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>THE REPUBLIC <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, CAPE COAST]<o:p></o:p>[1989-90]1 GLR 266<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:
24 OCTOBER
1988<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">

F. E. OBENG FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

ADU MANTE 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 0in 0in">

KPEGAH J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF KPEGAH J.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal against the conviction and sentence of the appellant by the District
Court, Grade II, Assin Fosu presided over by his Worship W.A.M. Swatson. The
appellant and two others were charged with the offences of conspiracy to commit
crime contrary to section 23 (1) of the Criminal Code, 1960 (Act 29) and fraud
by false pretences contrary to section 131 of Act 29. They all pleaded guilty
and were convicted on their own plea and each sentenced to twelve months’
imprisonment with hard labour on each count; the sentences were to run
concurrently. Although the record of proceedings indicate that the appellant
was sentenced to twelve months’ imprisonment, he, in his affidavit in support
of an application for extension of time within which to file an appeal, deposed
that he was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment with hard labour. The
conviction and sentence of the appellant was on 22 December 1987. It is not
clear when the appellant was released, but he was before he filed his petition
of appeal on 16 June 1988. It does appear, therefore, that the appellant
actually served six months rather than the twelve months reflected by the
record of proceedings. This discrepancy, if I may call it so, is not of any
consequence in this appeal and I do not intend that it delays any consideration
of the legal points raised by this appeal. One fact however is certain; the
appeal is hopelessly out of time and therefore prima facie inadmissible.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>After
filing his petition of appeal, the appellant felt he needed an extension of
time within which to file his appeal so he took this step by filing a motion
asking for extension of time. As a matter of prudence, I decided to let the
application for extension of time be heard first instead of taking the appeal
and possibly declaring it to be inadmissible because it has been filed out of
time. When the application for extension of time came up for hearing, I decided
to admit the appeal for hearing and promised to embody my reasons in the main
judgment. I propose to fulfil this promise and intend to devote some time to it
for I find the legal matters to be touched upon intriguing. But, before I
divulge my reasons for accepting this rather belated appeal, I must need give
the facts and brief history of the case in the hope that it will assist an easy
comprehension of my treatment of the legal issues in the manner I propose to
do.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appellant is a trained teacher by profession and also a licensed herbalist. He
graduated from the Fosu Training College. While a student, the appellant was
practicing his trade as a herbalist. This led to his striking a close
friendship with one of the tutors whom he took to assisting with his spiritual
problems. This tutor later became the krontihene of Assin Kushea under the
stool name of Nana Minta Abu IV. Their friendship continued even after the
appellant graduated from the school and he kept on visiting and assisting his former
tutor in respect of his spiritual problems. In October 1987 the appellant and
two others paid a visit to the village of Kushea and lodged with his friend,
the krontihene. One of the appellant’s companions, who was charged as the
second accused and will be so referred to hereafter, was also a herbalist but
his licence had expired. The trade of the third person who was charged as the
third accused and will also be so referred to in this judgment was not
disclosed. These two people did not appeal against their conviction and
sentence. On the admitted facts there will be no justification for so doing.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>While
they were being hosted by the krontihene, the second accused struck a
conversation with the krontihene. In the course of the conversation, he told
the krontihene that he and his elders had offended their river god; that is the
god of River Pra. The krontihene became interested in the revelation of the
second accused and invited his elders. They had a spiritual consultation with
the second accused. In the course of the consultation, the second accused said
certain specific items were needed to be used in the rites to appease the river
god. He charged ¢10,000 for his services. The money and the items were readily
provided. The second accused then took the chief and his elders to the river
bank in the night for the pacification rites. The second accused at a certain
stage left the group. It was during this period that the river god was said to
have spoken to the chief and his elders about its anger with them. The
appellant was present at this ceremony of pacification. There is nothing in the
record of proceedings to suggest he took part in the rites being performed by
the second accused and I do not intend to assume such a fact. After the rites
they all came back home, with the krontihene and his elders apparently
satisfied with the performance of the second accused.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>