FAMOUS ADUKONU & ANOR. vs. THE REPUBLIC [2020]DLHC10105

Date	2020-11-30
Suit No.	CR/0037/2021
Citation No.	[2020]DLHC10105

JUSTICE RUBY ARYEETEY

ISAAC AIDOO (For APPLICANT)

AKOSUA KUSI (For REPUBLIC)

[2020]DLHC10105
																																						<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" >FAMOUS
ADUKONU &amp; ANOR.<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE
REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT
(CRIMINAL COURT 1), ACCRA]<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" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">CR/0037/2021&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 NOVEMBER, 2020<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>ISAAC AIDOO (For APPLICANT) <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="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">AKOSUA KUSI (For REPUBLIC) <o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>JUSTICE RUBY ARYEETEY<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;line-height:115%;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">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;This is an
application for bail pending trial.&nbsp; The
affidavit supporting the application deposed to by the deponent, disclosed that
the Applicants have been charged with the offences of Conspiracy and Murder at
the District Court as shown in Exhibit. <o:p></o:p>Counsel for the
Applicants submitted that Prosecution in their affidavit in opposition have
intimated that they not even received the case docket from the police. In the
circumstance the prosecution of the case is being delayed because no bill of
indictment has been served on accused persons.<o:p></o:p>Counsel further
submitted that the Accused persons have a fixed place of abode at Maame Dede
junction as well as people of substance to stand surety for them contrary to
what is deposed to in the affidavit in opposition. They prayed the court to
exercise its discretion in their favor. <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Prosecution
opposed the application for bail pending trial and argued that although the
applicants alleged that they have a fixed place of abode nowhere in their
affidavit in support did they give or state the address of the alleged place of
abode. Again the applicants alleged that they have sureties to stand in for
them if the court grants then bail yet they did not state anywhere in their
affidavit in support the details of these sureties to enable the court
determine whether they are of good character, independent and of sufficient
means. They further argued that the fact that the Respondent say they have not
received the docket from the Police does not in any way mean that there has
been a delay. Investigations may still be on going and that may account for the
reason why the docket has not been forwarded to the Attorney General. They
prayed for the instant application to be refused as same is without merit.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Decision<o:p></o:p>A court of competent jurisdiction in granting or
refusing bail though discretionary must be exercised according to law by
complying with section 96 (1) – (6) of Act 30. The factors which should be
taken into consideration when granting bail are the nature of the accusation,
the nature of the evidence supporting the accusation and whether the evidence
is strong as well as the punishment for the sentence. Bail however shall not be
used as a punishment but merely to ensure the attendance of the accused person
in court.<o:p></o:p>Since the 1992 Constitution is the fundamental law
of the land, to the extent that Article 14 (3) and (4) mandates bail for all
offences, one requirement which is apparent is the provision that a person
charged with an offence is entitled to bail if he is not tried “within a
reasonable time”. The applicant’s submission in this instant application is
based on the fact that the Prosecution has delayed the prosecution of this case
since they have not even received the docket from the Police yet. As such no
bill of indictment has been served on them to indicate that trial will start
anytime soon. &nbsp;<o:p></o:p>Prosecution on the other hand argued that Accused
persons have not satisfied the court with information concerning their fixed
place of abode and details of their sureties to enable the court make a
determination based on these facts to grant them bail. Apart from this the fact
that Prosecution has not received the docket from the Police does not in anyway
mean that there has been a delay because investigations may still be on going
and that may account for the reason why the docket has not been forwarded to
the Attorney General. <o:p></o:p>There are four main grounds based on which a court
</main>