THE REPUBLIC vs GODFRED OCANSEY [2009]DLHC16626

Date	2009-04-30
Suit No.	CASE NO. ACC 4/2009
Citation No.	[2009]DLHC16626

HIS LORDSHIP SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU J.

MR. AUGUSTINES OBOUR

MR. MOHAMMED ATTA

[2009]DLHC16626
																																						<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" >THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>GODFRED OCANSEY<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;<div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: black; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: -0.35pt;">

<a name="_heading=h.gjdgxs"></a>CASE NO. ACC 4/2009&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:
30TH APRIL, 2009<o:p></o:p>

MR. AUGUSTINES OBOUR STATE ATTORNEY FOR
THE REPUBLIC <o:p></o:p>

MR. MOHAMMED ATTA FOR THE ACCUSED PERSON<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>HIS LORDSHIP SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU J. <o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: black; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: black; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: -0.35pt;">

JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;The accused person is
charged with the offence of defilement contrary to section 101 of the Criminal
Offences Act 1960 Act 29.&nbsp; He is also
charged with the offence of incest contrary to section 105 of the Criminal Offences
Act of 1960 Act 29.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;At the trial, the
prosecution called five (5) persons to testify on its behalf after which the
accused person also gave evidence and then called two more persons to give
evidence in support of his case.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Section 101 under which
the accused person has been charged in respect of count one provides at
subsection 2 that:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>“(2)&nbsp;&nbsp; Whoever naturally or unnaturally carnally
knows any child under sixteen years of age, whether with or without his or her
consent commits an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to
imprisonment for a term of not less than seven years and not more than
twenty-five years”.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Thus, for the prosecution
to succeed on the charge of defilement as defined under the section quoted
above, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:-.35pt;margin-bottom:
0cm;margin-left:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:0cm;
line-height:115%;mso-list:l14 level1 lfo1;tab-stops:list 22.5pt 58.5pt">(a)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The accused has had a natural or
unnatural carnal knowledge of a person and,<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:-.35pt;margin-bottom:
0cm;margin-left:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:0cm;
line-height:115%;mso-list:l14 level1 lfo1;tab-stops:list 22.5pt">(b)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the person is a child below the
age of sixteen (16) years.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;If the prosecution succeeds
in proving the above ingredients then it will fall on the accused person to
lead evidence that will raise a reasonable doubt as provided for by section
13(2) of the Evidence Act 1975 NRCD 323 which states that:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“13(2)
Except as provided in section 15(3), in a criminal action the burden of
persuasion, when it is on the accused as to any fact the converse of which is
essential to guilt, requires only that the accused raise a reasonable doubt as
to guilt”.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;