REPUBLIC vs. CIRCUIT COURT, KOFORIDUA; EX PARTE DIDIEYE III [2005]DLCA1021

Date	2005-07-08
Suit No.
Citation No.	[2005]DLCA1021

AKAMBA JA

OSEI JA

HEWARD-MILLS J

AFARI YEBOAH FOR THE APPELLANT.

ERIC AGBOLOSO CHIEF STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[2005]DLCA1021
																																						<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" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">CIRCUIT COURT, KOFORIDUA; EX PARTE DIDIEYE III<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[2003-2005]
1 GLR 152<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">

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>AFARI
YEBOAH FOR THE APPELLANT.<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">

ERIC
AGBOLOSO, CHIEF STATE ATTORNEY, FOR THE RESPONDENT. <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">

AKAMBA
AND OSEI JJA AND HEWARD-MILLS J<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>Akamba JA.
This is an appeal against the ruling of the High Court, Koforidua, delivered on
9 April 2003. The gist of the facts, as gleaned from the record of appeal, are
that on 26 February 2002 the appellant herein was arraigned before the Circuit
Tribunal, (now Circuit Court) Koforidua on three counts of forgery, possession
of forged document and uttering forged document contrary to the appropriate
provisions of the Criminal Code, 1960 (Act 29). The appellant pleaded not
guilty to all the charges levelled against him.<o:p></o:p>The
subject of the forgery charges is a document entitled, “A report on enquiry
into Akwamus and Kwahu’s Land Dispute 1845” (hereinafter referred to as exhibit
A.)<o:p></o:p>Exhibit
A was first the subject of civil litigation before the Kwahu Traditional
Council and subsequently in two suits at the High Court. In the two suits
before the High Court, the appellant obtained judgment following the court’s
declaration that exhibit A was authentic and genuine. By these judgments the
appellant’s family was declared owners of the disputed land. The present status
of the matter is that there is an appeal pending before the Supreme Court from
the decision of the Court of Appeal which affirmed the decision of the High
Court. Whilst the civil appeal to the Supreme Court is pending, the respondent
lodged a complaint with the police alleging that exhibit A is a forged
document. In the result, the appellant was arrested and after police
investigations, he has been charged before the Circuit Tribunal, Koforidua with
the offences above indicated.<o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied
with the new decision of the matter, the appellant initiated proceedings in the
High Court, Koforidua for the issuance of the prerogative writs of prohibition
and certiorari against the circuit court form hearing the criminal case against
him and also the writ of certiorari to quash the entire record in the said
criminal case No 52/2002 entitled “The Republic v Nana Anku Dododzah Didieye
III.”<o:p></o:p>The
appellant was granted leave on 22 April 2002 wherefore he filed the pursuant
motion on notice for the prerogative writs on 26 April 2002. The High Court,
after hearing both counsel for and against the motion, ruled on 9 April 2003
refusing the application to prohibit the circuit court from trying the
appellant and for certiorari to quash the proceedings in the criminal case. It
is therefore against this ruling that the present appeal has been lodged.<o:p></o:p>I
propose to begin the determination of this appeal with a consideration of the
grounds of appeal. I do not think that counsel has addressed himself to the
fact that appeals are a creation of statute and that no one has an inherent
right of appeal. In this case the statute which has created the right of
appeal, ie the Constitution, 1992, equally conferred powers on the Rules of
Court Committee by article 157 (2) of the Constitution, 1992 to make rules by
which the right of appeal may be exercised. The result of this is the Court of
Appeal Rules, 1997 (CI 19) and its subsequent amendments. I notice that counsel
has failed to be guided by CI 19 as amended by the Court of Appeal (Amendment)
Rules, 1998 (CI 21) and the Court of Appeal (Amendment) Rules, 1999 (CI 25) in
fashioning out his ground</main>