TETTEH vs. THE REPUBLIC [2002]DLSC16007

Date	2002-04-11
Suit No.	CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 3/99
Citation No.	[2002]DLSC16007

AMPIAH JSC

KPEGAH JSC

ACQUAH JSC

ATUGUBA JSC

ADZOE JSC.

KOKA FOR APPELLANT

GROUP CAPTAIN OBENG NTIM FOR REPUBLIC

[2002]DLSC16007
																																						<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" >TETTEH<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[2001-2002] SCGLR<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0in 0in 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 3/99&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
DATE: 11TH APRIL 2002<o:p></o:p>

KOKA FOR APPELLANT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>AMPIAH
JSC, KPEGAH JSC, ACQUAH JSC, ATUGUBA JSC, ADZOE JSC.<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0in;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>ADZOE
JSC. <o:p></o:p>The complainant in this case was an
officer in the Ghana Armed Forces. He was the Provost Marshal. His duties
touched on security and discipline within the Armed Forces. The appellant, on
the other hand, was a corporal. He had had nineteen years' military service to
his credit.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;On the night of 19 November 1996, the
appellant was alleged to have done something very strange. The appellant, who
was then living in barracks in the Burma Camp in Accra, had earlier in the day
left the barracks for town. He spent much time in town. At the time he was
driving back to the barracks at about 11.30 pm, the Provost Marshal was also
driving into the Burma Camp. According to the prosecution, the Provost Marshal
stopped at the Burma Camp Traffic Lights because the red lights were on,
meaning all vehicles must stop. But as he waited patiently for the green lights
to come on, a car from behind was driven past him, ignoring the red signal
lights. When the green lights came on, the Provost Marshal decided to find out
the person who drove through the red lights. He therefore followed that car and
found it parked near a house. The owner came out and was about to enter his
room when the Provost Marshal walked up to him and, recognizing the appellant,
the Provost Marshal asked why he drove through the red traffic lights. The appellant
replied the red lights were not on. The denial surprised the complainant and he
asked for the appellant's identity card according to the prosecution, the
appellant produced the card; but when he realized that the complainant intended
to keep the card and also lodge a complaint against him, he decided to collect
back his card. During the struggle, he was alleged to have hit the complainant
in the face with a blow. The complainant fell down and the appellant sat over
him and rained blows on him. Some people who were around the scene went to the
rescue of the complainant.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;When freed, the complainant rushed to
the military police and reported the incident. Men were sent to arrest the
apellant but the appellant was combative and engaged them in a fight. It took a
three man reinforcement to overpower the appellant and confine him to cells.
He was later charged with the typically military offences of:(i) striking a
superior officer; (ii) use of violence against a superior officer; and (iii)
conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. The appellant denied the
charges.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;His defence was that he was returning
from town to the barracks that night when he realized that another car was
following him. When he was checked at the traffic lights and allowed to go, he
realized that the car was still following him. And when he stopped in front of
his room and was about to enter, the man caught up with him and1asked for his
identity card. He did not know who the man was. It was dark and he could not
identify the man, not even by his voice. He showed the card to the man and the
man pounced on him and started struggling with him to collect the card. In the
process, the two of them fell down. Then some neighbours came and separated
them. <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Later, some military policemen came to
arrest him. He called two witnesses including his wife who can properly be
described as an eye-witness. The wife's evidence suggested that the struggle
between the two men began when the complainant held the appellant's
"trousers and held the shirt at his chest." She said she shouted and
one Staff Sergeant (S/Sgt) Otu came; but before Otu arrived, the appellant
"was trying to release himself from the grips of the man and they all
fell." S/Sgt Otu was the next witness. He told the court that he was
asleep when he heard an unusual noise and when he rushed out he "saw two
men holding each other. I went there and separated them."<o:p></o:p>The court itself called one witness who
happened to be the wife of the complainant. She was in the car with the
complainant and could also be properly described as an eye-witness. Her
evidence was that when she and the complainant got to the appellant's house,
the complainant came out of the car but she remained inside. The appellant's
car had been parked right in front of the building. According to her, when the
complainant got there:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>