THE REPUBLIC vs GODFRED AGGREY AND OTHERS [2012]DLCA16081

Date	2012-04-25
Suit No.	SUIT NO. H2/01/2012
Citation No.	[2012]DLCA16081

S.K.MARFUL-SAU J.A C.J

HONYENUGA J.A

DENNIS ADJEI J.A.

MRS KLINOGO (CSA)

MR. FELIX FORSON

[2012]DLCA16081
																																						<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>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>VS<o:p></o:p>GODFRED AGGREY AND OTHERS<o:p></o:p>(APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL CAPE-COAST]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

&nbsp;SUIT NO. H2/01/2012&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; &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:25th April, 2012<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:150%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">MRS KLINOGO (CSA), MR. FELIX
FORSON<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>S.K.MARFUL-SAU
J.A C.J,&nbsp; HONYENUGA J.A, DENNIS ADJEI J.A.<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 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;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:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>DENNIS ADJEI, J.A.<o:p></o:p>This
is an appeal against the judgment delivered by the High Court Sekondi&nbsp; on 6th June, 2007. On 15th
March, 2010 the Court of Appeal, Accra granted&nbsp;
leave to the 3rd&nbsp;
accused person, the&nbsp; appellant
herein to&nbsp; appeal against both conviction
and sentence. On 18th March, 2010 the appellant filed his
Notice&nbsp; of Appeal pursuant to the leave
granted him to&nbsp; appeal against both
conviction and sentence. The appellant filed two grounds of appeal, namely;<o:p></o:p>“1.
That the conviction was an error in law and<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;2. That the sentence was herein and excessive”.<o:p></o:p>The&nbsp;&nbsp; appellant indicated that he would file
additional grounds of appeal on receipt of the&nbsp;
record&nbsp; of appeal but did not file
any.<o:p></o:p>The
brief facts of the case were that one Sharon Owusu Antwi who was a student of
Takoradi Polytechnic was robbed by the accused persons and&nbsp; one other person who is&nbsp; at large. On 11th October,
2006&nbsp; at about 3 a.m. the&nbsp; victim was on&nbsp;
her way&nbsp; to the Takoradi lorry
station to&nbsp; board&nbsp; a bus&nbsp;
to Accra and on reaching&nbsp; Melcom
she saw&nbsp; four person(men) who were&nbsp; hurriedly after her. One&nbsp; of the four&nbsp;
men&nbsp; who&nbsp; was then wearing a black ‘T’ shirt tried to
pull her bag which&nbsp; was in her armpit.
He&nbsp; pushed the victim unto a cement block
and took away her bag. The&nbsp; bag contained
a&nbsp; camera mobile phone, an amount of
GH¢87.50, a book, student and&nbsp; voter’s
Identity Cards. When the victim&nbsp; got&nbsp; up from&nbsp;
the attack she found&nbsp; that her
palm had been slashed. She reported to the Market Circle Police at&nbsp; Takoradi&nbsp;
and was&nbsp; issued&nbsp; with a medical report&nbsp; to&nbsp;
attend hospital. At&nbsp; about 1 pm on
the same day the four men (the accused&nbsp;
persons and the one at large) boarded an Accra bound city express bus
with a locally manufactured pistol, sharp cutlass and three(3) razor&nbsp; blades with the&nbsp; intention to&nbsp;
rob the passengers on board. The transport officer at the bus terminal
became suspicious of the four men and he alerted the driver. The driver drove
to the Police Station for them to be arrested (but the one at large) Obed, who
was sitting in front of the&nbsp; bus alighted
and escaped.<o:p></o:p>I
will now address the grounds of appeal. The appellant in his written submission
persuaded the court to declare the trial a nullity because it was conducted
contrary to law and procedure. According to the appellant, they were tried and
convicted&nbsp; for the offences of conspiracy
to commit&nbsp; robbery contrary to sections
23(1) and 149 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960(Act 29) and Robbery Contrary&nbsp; to section 149&nbsp; of the Criminal Offences Act&nbsp; 1960&nbsp;
(Act 29) and the&nbsp; offence of robbery
being a first degree&nbsp; felony the mode of
trial&nbsp; should have been&nbsp; on indictment and not&nbsp; summary as was done in this case by the&nbsp; trial High court. The appellant further
contended that Article 19 (2) (a) of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana
1992 provides that the mode of trial for offences of which the punishment may
be life or death, apart&nbsp; from treason or
high treason shall be tried by a Judge and a jury; that is&nbsp; trial on indictment and failing to conduct a
trial on indictment renders the proceedings a nullity. See the cases of Mosi
vs. Bagyina [1963]2 GLR 337 and Acheampong vs. the Republic [1996-97] SCGLR
566.<o:p></o:p>The
appellant did not advert his mind to the Criminal and Other Offences
(Amendment) Act 2004, Act 646 which amended section 149 of Act 29 and NRCD II,
the Suppression of Robbery Decree. Act 646 provides that robbery&nbsp; could be&nbsp;
tried&nbsp; either summarily or on
indictment and has also varied the&nbsp;
sentences provided in section 149 of Act 29 and NRCD II. The law&nbsp; now provides the&nbsp; minimum sentences that the courts can
impose&nbsp; in robbery cases where no weapon
is used and where an offensive weapon or missile is used and they are ten(10)
years and fifteen (15) years respectfully. The contention by counsel for the
appellant that robbery can only be tried on indictment is without legal basis
and same is dismissed as without merits.<o:p></o:p>The
appellant has contended that the conviction was an error in law.<o:p></o:p>Pw1
testified that the she saw four men hurriedly chasing her when she was heading
towards the bus&nbsp; terminal&nbsp; and one of them in an effort to snatch&nbsp; her bag pushed her to some&nbsp; cement block&nbsp;
and when she got up she found&nbsp;
that her palm had been slashed. There is a medical report, exhibit ‘L’
corroborating the&nbsp; harm caused to
the&nbsp; Pw1&nbsp;
in her palm. The identity card of the Pw1 which was&nbsp; in the bag that was seized was found on
the&nbsp; 1st accused person. The
first accused&nbsp; person&nbsp; in his&nbsp;
caution&nbsp; statement admitted&nbsp; tha</main>