THE REPUBLIC vs. DANLADI AKANVONG [2019]DLHC8246

Date	2019-10-28
Suit No.	UE/B6/HC1/D2/02/18
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC8246

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE JACOB B. BOON

EMMANUEL OTOO-BOISON FOR THE REPUBLIC.

RICHARD ADAZABRA FOR ACCUSSED.

[2019]DLHC8246
																																						<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>DANLADI AKANVONG<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
BOLGATANGA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

UE/B6/HC1/D2/02/18
&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: 28TH
OCTOBER, 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>EMMANUEL OTOO-BOISON FOR THE REPUBLIC.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

RICHARD ADAZABRA FOR ACCUSSED.<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE JACOB B. BOON<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

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

</div>Accused person
alleges he is a farmer and is charged on one count with robbery, contrary to
section 149 of the Criminal Offences Act of Ghana, 1960, Act 29. He is alleged
to have attacked the complainant, a female storekeeper at Sandema District
Hospital, with a knife around nine o’clock in the night of 15th
January, 2018, and snatched her infinix mobile phone.<o:p></o:p>According to
the prosecution, the complainant, who was the first prosecution witness (PW1)
at the trial, was returning home after visiting her brother and was then
receiving a call on her infinix phone when she heard a voice shouting on her to
hand over to him her cell phone. She ignored the person and continued to listen
to the call; that the person caught up with her and demanded she handed over
the phone; she again refused to do so which led to a struggle between them in
the process of which the accused kicked her and she fell. It was at this stage,
according to the prosecution, that she took a good look at the person and
recognized him to be the accused. It is alleged accused pulled a knife, and
fearing for her life, PW1 handed the phone to him.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;It is the prosecution’s further case that in
the course of the robbery PW1 shouted for help and that drew the attention of a
witness on a motor bike to the scene; that the witness pursued the accused but
he managed to escape with the phone. The following day, PW1 lodged an official
report of the robbery at Sandema Police Station leading to the arrest of the accused
person three days later on 18th January, 2018 at a spot opposite the
Volta River Authority station in Sandema. Prosecution alleged that the accused
was spotted by PW1 on her way to work and she called the person who witnessed the
robbery, and together, they arrested the accused and handed him to the police
who charged him with the offence of robbery after investigations.<o:p></o:p>Accused denied
the charge. According to him at the time he is alleged to have attacked PW1 he
was with his brother in their mother’s store because the mother had travelled
and he and his brother took care of the store. His brother called Gilbert
Akanvong was called by accused as his second witness (DW2), in addition to
another, Askabata Robertson (DW1), who said he was sitting with accused and
others when PW1 and the person who is said to have witnessed the robbery came
around and confronted the accused in respect of the robbery but he denied it.
He said accused agreed to follow PW1 and the witness to the Police Station
because he said he was innocent and had nothing to fear. He admitted he did not
witness the robbery and cannot also remember the date accused followed PW1 and her
witness to the Police Station because he did not think he would one day &nbsp;be called as a witness in that matter.<o:p></o:p>In this case it
is evident the testimony of the witness who is said to have arrived at the time
accused was allegedly attacking PW1 and who is alleged to have pursued the
accused is a material witness as his evidence would be essential in assisting
the court take a decision one way or the other.<o:p></o:p>In this regard,
counsel for the accused rightly referred to the case of Adam v The Republic (1992) 2 GLR 150, holding (6) at 153 that:<o:p></o:p>“In a criminal
prosecution a “material” witness was one whose evidence would help the court
decide on the ingredients of the charge before it or whose evidence would help
remove any doubt that might exist in the prosecution’s case, or whose evidence
would help displace any reasonably probable defence that the accused might
have. Accordingly, a material witness was necessarily a witness for the
prosecution and not the defence since the prosecution assumed the burden of
proving guilt. However, the prosecution could refuse to call a material witness
if he would not speak the truth or his evidence would negative that of the
prosecution and strengthen that of the accused; he was a close relative of the
accused; or his identity was not sufficiently established to enable the
prosecution to contact him before the trial; or he could be an accomplice or
co-assused; or there were several witnesses who could testify on the point…”<o:p></o:p>In that case,
because the prosecution failed to call a witness deemed by the court to be a
material one, whose evidence was vital because it would have helped the court
in its determination of the matter before it, the Tamale High Court, presided
by Benin J, as he then was, held that the trial Circuit Court, Tamale, should
have held that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt
as expected of them by law in a criminal trial.<o:p></o:p>