REPUBLIC VRS BONNY (UE/BG/DC/B18/37/2024) [2025] GHACA 8 (26 February 2025)

*HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* CORAM: HIS WORSHIP MAWUKOENYA NUTEKPOR (DISTRICT MAGISTRATE), SITTING AT THE DISTRICT COURT, BOLGATANGA IN THE UPPER EAST REGION OF GHANA, ON WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025. CASE NO. UE/BG/DC/B18/37/2024 THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY TIME: 09:22AM ACCUSED PERSON PRESENT INSPECTOR BALIKI ISSAKA FOR THE REPUBLIC ISSAHAKU TAHIRU LAWAL, ESQ. FOR THE ACCUSED PERSON JUDGMENT Introduction 1. The accused person was brought or arraigned before this court on the 25th day of September, 2023 and charged for the offence of Desertion contrary to section 24 (1) of the Police Service Act, 1970, (Act 350). The accused person pleaded not guilty to the charge against him, hence, the burden is on the prosecution to prove its case by admissible and credible evidence, every ingredient of the offence of desertion beyond reasonable doubt. See the case of Republic vrs. Adu-Boahen and Another (1993–94) 2 GLR 324 -342, per Kpegah JSC. *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 1 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* Facts of Prosecution’s Case 2. The facts of the prosecution’s case as presented to the court and attached to the charge sheet filed on 25th September, 2023 is that the complainant in this case is the Commander of Regional Communications Unit of the Ghana Police Service, Bolgatanga. Accused was a serving Police Officer, stationed at same Unit. In the month of April, 2023, accused was detailed for patrol duty from 02/04/2023 to 08/04/2023. However, on the 15/04/2023, it came to the notice of the complainant that, the accused had not been attending the duty he was assigned. On same day, the complainant led a team of Police officers to the Police barracks at Tongo, a suburb of Bolgatanga where accused resided. The accused was not met in the house and could also not be reached through all his known contacts. Several efforts were made to locate the accused but to no avail as his whereabouts it not known. The complainant brought the development to the notice of the Police Administration. The lnspector General of Police subsequently directed action be instituted to declare the accused as a deserter in line with the Police Service Act, 1970 (Act 350). Whilst processes were underway to declare accused a deserter he resurfaced at the Regional Police Headquarters (RHQ), Bolgatanga on 20/09/2023 and was paraded by his Unit Commander, ASP/Mr. David Fianko Okyere before the Regional Crime Officer, C/Supt./Mr. Reuben Dugah who in turn instructed the immediate arrest of the accused in line with the Police Administrative directive. After investigation, he was charged with the Offence of Desertion. Burden of Proof *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 2 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* 3. In a criminal case where an accused person pleaded not guilty, it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused person. Article 19 clause (2)(c) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana provides that: “A person charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed to be innocent until he is proved or has pleaded guilty.” The proof required is proof beyond reasonable doubt. The Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323), outlines this in subsections 11(2) and 13(1) and Section 22 as follows: 11(2) “In a criminal action the burden of producing evidence, when it is on the prosecution as to any fact which is essential to guilt requires the prosecution to produce sufficient evidence so that on all the evidence a reasonable mind could find the existence of the fact beyond a reasonable doubt. 13(1) In any civil or criminal action the burden of persuasion as to the commission by a party of a crime which is directly in issue requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Section 22: In a criminal action a presumption operates against the accused as to a fact which is essential to guilt only if the existence of the basic facts that give rise to the presumption are found or otherwise established beyond a reasonable doubt and thereupon in the case of a rebuttable presumption the accused need only raise a reasonable doubt as to the existence of the presumed fact”. *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 3 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* 4. The Supreme Court in a unanimous decision in the case of Abdulai Fuseini v The Republic, reported in [2020] Crim LR, page 331 reiterated and affirmed the basic philosophical principles underpinning criminal prosecution in our courts as follows:- “In criminal trials, the burden of proof against an accused person is on the prosecution. The standard of proof is proof beyond reasonable doubt. Proof beyond reasonable doubt actually means “proof of the essential ingredients of the offence charged and not mathematical proof.” Emphasis supplied 5. In the case of Miller Vrs Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 ALL ER 372 at 373 Lord Denning (as he then was) explained proof beyond reasonable doubt as follows: “It need not reach certainty but it must carry a high degree of probability, proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond a shadow of doubt. The law would fail to protect the community if it admitted fanciful possibilities to deflect the course of justice … If the evidence is so strong against a man as to leave only a remote possibility in his favour, which can be dismissed with the sentence ‘of course, it is possible but not in the least probable’, the case is proved beyond reasonable doubt, but nothing short of that will suffice.” Emphasis supplied 6. In the case of Dexter Eddie Johnson Vrs the Republic [2011] SCGLR 601 Dotse JSC discussed the principle of proof beyond reasonable doubt in some detail and cited the case of Woolmington Vrs DPP [1934] AC 462 where Lord Sankey made the following statement: “Throughout the web of the English Criminal Law, the golden thread is always to be seen, that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 4 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* prisoner’s guilt – if at the end of and on the whole of the case, there is a reasonable doubt, created by the evidence given by either the prosecution or the prisoner – the prosecution has not made out the case and the prisoner is entitled to an acquittal. No matter what the charge or where the trial, the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common law of England and no attempt to whittle it down can be entertained.” See the case of: Commissioner of Police Vrs Isaac Antwi [1961] GLR 408 where the Woolmington principle was applied. 7. See also the following cases on the burden of proof in criminal cases: Frimpong @Iboman v The Republic [2012] 1 SCGLR 297, Gligah & Anr v The Republic [2010] SCGLR 870, Tetteh v The Republic [2001-2002] SCGLR 854, Francis Yirenkyi v Republic [2017-2020] 1 SCGLR 433 at 457 and 464-466, just to mention a few. The Law on the Offence of Desertion 8. Section 24 of the Police Service Act, 1970 (Act 350) provides that: Section 24—Desertion. (1) A police officer who deserts commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred penalty units or to imprisonment not exceeding three months, or to both fine and the imprisonment. (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a police officer deserts where the police officer leaves or fails to attend a place of duty with the intention of remaining permanently absent from duty without proper authority or if, having left or failed *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 5 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* to attend at his place of duty in any circumstances, does an act with the like intention. (3) A police officer who is absent without authority for a continuous period of twenty-one days or more shall, for the purposes of this section, unless the contrary is proved, be presumed to have deserted. From the above provision, the elements that prosecution must prove to succeed in this case are that: (a) the accused person is a police officer (b) the accused person absented himself from work or duty without authority for a continuous period of twenty-one (21) days or more and (c) accused person intend to remain permanently absent from duty. Evidence of the Prosecution 9. In instant case, prosecution in an attempt to prove its case called three (3) witnesses. PW1-D/Inspr. Sampson Micah testified that the 5th day of September, 2023, this case was referred to him for investigation. He stated that on receipt of the case docket and after studying it, he realized that the Inspector General of Police (IGP) has directed that the Upper East Regional CID should immediately process CID Forms 39 and 73 with the of the view of publishing the accused person in the Police Gazette a deserter. He testified that on 20th September, 2023, at 0940 hours thereabout, accused person resurfaced at the Regional Police Headquarters/Bolgatanga, he was arrested and paraded before his former Unit *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 6 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* Commander DSP/Mr David Fianko Okyere for further action. After preliminary interrogation by the Unit Commander and the Station officer, accused was handed over to the Regional CID/Bolgatanga for interrogation and possible prosecution as per the Section 24 of the Police Service Act, 1970 (Act 350). He stated that during interrogation, accused person admitted having deserted his duty post and vacated without permission since 8th April, 2023. Accused person further stated that he unreservedly regret his action. Accused added that he was depressed and did not know what came over him to behave in such a manner. He tendered in evidence the following documents: Investigation Caution Statement of accused person as Exhibit A, Investigation Charge Statement of accused person as Exhibit B, Resignation letter of accused person dated 10/04/2023 as Exhibit C, a letter of re-joining the Ghana Police Service by accused dated 09/09/2023 as Exhibit C1, a copy of Duty roster for the week ending 08/04/23, as Exhibit D and a copy of duty roster for the week ending 23/09/2023 as exhibit D1. 10. PW2-Inspector Ernest Affum testified as follows that: “on the 2nd April, 2023, accused No. 47925 G/Cpl. Bismark Bonney was detailed to perform duty at Earl Mining Company at Gbane in the Talensi District of the Upper East Region for the week ending 8th April, 2023, but he failed to do so without any reason. Accused was again detailed to perform duty at the Regional Communication officer from 9th April to 15th 2023, but he again failed to do so without any reason cause and his whereabouts was not known to the Unit. Several phone calls were made to his MTN contact number 0247708185 proved futile. I together with inspector Festus Aboagye and No. 45314 G/sgt. Daniel Henry Abbey left for accused place of abode at Tongo but could not trace him. I then informed the *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 7 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* Unit Commander, DSP/Mr. David Fianko Okyere of the incident. On receipt of the information, the Unit Commander DSP/Mr. David Fianko Okyere personally proceeded with the team to Tongo Police Station enroute to accused place of abode. On arrival at Tongo, enquiries were made from the Police proved unsuccessful. The team proceeded to accused house but could still not trace him. Accused person Bismark Bonney’s door was forced open but he was not inside. After the door was opened it was detected that he left some few police accoutrements in the room before he vacated. Preliminary investigation within the vicinity indicated he left with his wife who is also a Policewoman and their whereabouts was not known. The Unit commander then instructed that I take disciplinary action against him and forward same for further action. On 26th May, 2023 a letter of resignation dated 10th April, 2023, written by accused was received by the Unit and same forwarded to the Regional Commander for further action. On 10th May, 2023, after several search for accused proved futile, the Unit Commander DSP/Mr. David Fianko Okyere proceeded to Tongo to retrieve the remaining accoutrement left behind by the accused. On 19th September, 2023, at 0905 hours, accused who left the station unceremoniously without permission resurfaced at the Regional Police Headquarters, Bolgatanga/UER. I paraded accused Bismark Bonney before the Unit commander and during interrogation, accused told Police that he left without permission due to till-health and depression. The Unit commander then submitted his written report to the Regional command for further action. Accused on his return also submitted a letter expressing his interest of rejoining the Ghana Police Service. After preliminary interrogation, accused was handed over to the Regional Criminal Investigation Department (RCID) Bolgatanga/UER *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 8 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* for further action in line with Section 24 of the Police Service Act, 1970 (Act 350).” 11. PW3-DSP/Mr. David Fianko Okyere testified as follows that: “On the 13th day of April, 2023, the Station officer of the Regional Communication and ICT Unit Inspector Ernest Affum reported to me that the whereabouts of No. 47925/G/CPL Bismark Bonney was not known to the Unit. That himself together with Inspector Festus Aboagye and No. 46314 G/Sgt Daniel Henry Abbey left for accused place at Tongo but could not trace him. That accused was detailed for duty at Earl Mining Company at Gbane in the Talensi District from 2nd April to 8th April, 2023, but he failed to do so. Accused again failed to perform duty he was detailed for at the Regional Communication office/ Bolgatanga for the week ending 15th April, 2023, without any reasonable excuse. On receipt of the information, myself together with Inspector Ernest Affum and PW/CPL Matilda Opoku Ware immediately proceeded to Tongo Police Station enroute to accused house to search for him but he was nowhere to be found. His door was forced opened, but he was nowhere to be found. Preliminary investigations within the neighborhood indicated that accused together with his wife also a policewoman vacated the house some days ago to an unknown destination. Several phone calls were placed to his cellphone number 0247708185 as well as some known family and friends to ascertain the whereabouts of accused but all to no avail. I together with the then Tongo District DSP/Mr. Edward Asante and the personnel returned the remaining police accoutrement in the room to the Regional Quartermaster Stores, Bolgatanga for safe keeping. His wife’s cellphone number was also tried severally but there was no response. When all efforts made to locate him proved futile, I instructed the station officer, Inspector Ernest Affum *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 9 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* to institute disciplinary action against him and Administrative report forward to the Command for further action. On 19th September, 2023, at 0950 hours, accused Bismark Bonney who deserted his post and vacated his house without permission resurfaced at the Regional Police Headquarters/Bolgatanga with the explanation that he left without permission on health grounds and under state of depression. On 20th September, 2023, at 1000 hours, I paraded accused before the Regional Crime officer, C/Supt/Mr. Reuben Dugah for further action in line with section 24 of the Police Service Act, 1970 (Act 350).” 12. From the evidence, the accused person applied for resignation from the Ghana Police Service dated 10/04/2023. See Exhibit C. He also applied to rejoin the Ghana Police Service on 09/09/2023. See Exhibit C1. There is no evidence that the accused person’s resignation letter has been approved or accepted by the Ghana Police Service and he is deemed to be a member of the Ghana Police Service. Indeed, if the accused person’s resignation had been approved, he would not have been standing trial for desertion. Accordingly, the accused person is still a police officer. 13. From the evidence, the prosecution witnesses maintained during cross examination by counsel for the accused person that the accused person absented himself from duty for more than twenty-one (21) days without authority. There is no dispute that he left post for more than five (5) months without permission. Thus, from 8th April 2023 to 20th September 2023 (about 165 days or five and half months). The law is that a police officer who is absent without authority for a continuous period of twenty-one days or more shall, unless the contrary is proved, be presumed to have deserted. The court therefore found as a fact that *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 10 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* the accused person absented himself from duty without permission for more than twenty one (21) days or about five and half months. 14. After the close of prosecution’s case, the court found that there was a prima facie or sufficient case against the accused person for him to be called upon to open his Defence. The court therefore called on the accused person to make a defence. It must be noted that at this juncture, the duty of the accused person is not to prove his innocence but to raise a reasonable doubt concerning his guilt by producing sufficient evidence. Sections 11(3) and 13(2) of the Evidence Act 1975, (NRCD 323) provides as follows “Section 11(3) In a criminal action, the burden of producing evidence, when it is on the accused as to a fact the converse of which is essential to guilt, requires the accused to produce sufficient evidence so that on the totality of the evidence a reasonable mind could have a reasonable doubt as to guilt. Section 13(2) Except as provided in section 15 (c), in a criminal action, the burden of persuasion, when it is on the accused as to a fact the converse of which is essential to guilt, requires only that the accused raise a reasonable doubt as to guilt.” 15. Also, Sankey LC noted in the case of Woolmington vrs. Director of Public Prosecutions [1935] AC 462 at 481 as follows: …while the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner, there is no such burden laid on the Prisoner to prove his innocence, and it is sufficient for him to raise a doubt as to his guilt; he is not to satisfy the jury of his innocence. *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 11 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* Evidence of the Accused Person and its Analysis 16. The accused person testified without a witness. He stated in his evidence in chief as follows: “I am a Police Officer. I was initially attached to the Regional Swat Unit of the Police Service, Bolgatanga and later transferred to the Communication Unit, Bolgatanga for seven (7) years now. Later, I had a transfer letter from the Police Headquarters, Accra transferring me to the Greater Accra Region. As result of this transfer, I moved all my belongings including my family to Accra. When I myself was about to move to Accra the Regional Police Commander DCOR Shaibu Gariba Parbey asked all those transferred not to move until replacements were sent. So while my family and all my belongings were in Accra, I remained in Bolgatanga without accommodation since I had already given out my room. This led to a misunderstanding with my wife which family led to a divorce and my wife’s family returned drinks and bride price to my family. I had two kids with my wife and after the divorce the pressure and financial demands from my wife for the up keep of the children became unbearable. My wife reported me to the Kasoa police in Accra and I was invited several times to Accra for non-maintenance of the children. In a month, I could be invited to Accra twice and all these were a drain on my finances. My wife also reported me to the Department of Social Welfare in Accra and I was charged for emotional abuse and all these made me confused. Due to the pressure from these allegations by my wife, it affected my performance at work and I was warned several times by my immediate supervisors to step up my performance. Some months later, I had challenges with depressive disorder which I consulted some Senior Police Officers including DSP Fabian Doglo Kuma *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 12 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* now retired for advice. I also visited the Police Clinic, Bolgatanga for medical checkup and was told that my blood pressure was very high and the doctors advised me to let things go off my mind else I might lose my life. These challenges affected my whole life as well as my work in the office so I had to move out of the office without being in my right sense of mind for solutions. Fortunately, a local herbalist treated me and I finally came to my senses and it was then that I realized that I have been out of office for some number of days or months without permission from my superior. When I realized this, I quickly went and reported myself to my immediate superior who ordered my arrest. I wish to state that I had challenges of depressive disorder which made me do things I cannot even recollect but it was not done in right frame of mind.” 17. The court is mandated to examine the defence of the accused person in three stages or apply what is usually referred to as the “three tier test” principle. Thus, in the Republic vs. Francis Ike Uyanwune [2013] 58 GMJ 162, C.A, or [2012] DLCA8143, the Court of Appeal speaking through Dennis Adjei, J.A. stated as follows: “The accused person must give evidence if prima facie case is established else, he may be convicted and if he opens his defence the court is required to satisfy itself that the explanation of the accused person is either acceptable or not. If it is acceptable the accused person should be acquitted and if it is not acceptable the court should probe further to see if it is reasonably probable. If it is reasonably probable, the accused person should be acquitted but if it is not and the court is satisfied that in considering the entire evidence on record the accused person is *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 13 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* guilty of the offence, the court must convict him. This test is what is usually, referred to as ‘three tier test’”. See also the case of Lutterodt vs. Commissioner of Police [1963]2 GLR 429. 18. From the explanation of the accused person, it is his case that he absented himself from work or duty due to ill-health specifically depressive disorder. He claims he visited Police Clinic, Bolgatanga but no report was taken from that place to substantiate his allegation so that a reasonable tribunal could conclude that the facts he alleges existed. Accused person admitted in cross examination that he is familiar with the Police Service Regulations (C.I. 76), having served in the Ghana Police Service for ten (10) years. This court therefore assumes he is aware of the fact that for your excuse for failing to report to work or duty to be accepted on the ground of illness, a medical certificate should be provided to that effect. The law is that a police officer who is not well shall be granted sick leave and where an officer is absent from duty on grounds of ill-health, the officer shall produce a medical certificate issued by the Medical Director, a registered medical practitioner or a registered herbal practitioner to that effect. Regulation 72 of the Police Service Regulations, 2012 (C.I. 76) provides as follows: “Sick leave 72(1) An officer whose state of health renders that officer unfit for duty shall be granted sick leave for the period that the Medical Director, a registered medical practitioner or a registered herbal medicine practitioner may recommend. (2) Where an officer is absent from duty on grounds of ill-health, the officer shall produce a medical certificate issued by the Medical Director, a registered medical practitioner or a registered herbal practitioner to that *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 14 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* effect. (3) An officer who has been (a) ill continuously without cure for a period of nine months, or (b) has been excused from duty on grounds of ill health for a cumulative period of thirty days within a period of ninety days shall be referred to a Medical Board appointed by the Medical Director to be examined and for the determination of that officer’s suitability or otherwise for continued service.” 19. In the instant case, the accused did not provide any medical certificate to show he had any medical condition called depression disorder which needs to be diagnosed. He claims he visited Police Clinic, Bolgatanga but no iota of evidence was produce in support of that. This court is of the view that for the explanation of an accused person to be acceptable or reasonably probable, the accused person must produce sufficient evidence. It is only after sufficient evidence is produced that a reasonable mind could have a reasonable doubt as to guilt of the accused person. See section 11(3) of the Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323) supra. A mere statement that I was sick or ill without sufficient evidence is not enough. This court is of the considered opinion that accepting a mere statement of ill-health without any sufficient evidence of ill-health will open the floodgates for police officers to vacate their post or absent themselves from duty for months or years and later come to say they were not well. 20. Also, from the explanation of the Accused person, he claims due to the challenges he was facing he had to move out of the office without being in her right sense of mind for solutions. It is his case that a local herbalist treated him and he finally came to his senses. He stated it was then that he realized he has been out of office for some number of days or months without permission *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 15 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* from his superior. The local herbalist who treated the accused person before he allegedly came to his senses is a material witness in this case and failure to call him as a witness is fatal to accused person’s defence. If the accused had appreciated the consequences of the charge against him, he would have called that local herbalist as a witness. Accused person claims he has the contact number of the local herbalist. Even a letter of confirmation or attestation from that local herbalist to the effect that the accused person came to him for treatment would have added some value to accused person’s explanation. 21. Moreover, the prosecution witnesses especially PW3 claim they visited the accused person’s place of abode as well as contacted her relatives or next of kin but no report of that were tendered in evidence. Counsel for accused person during cross examination of the prosecution witnesses sought to demonstrate that since the police failed to support their allegation that they visited the accused person’s place of abode as well as contacted her relatives or next of kin with any report, the conclusion is that they have not followed laid down procedures to declare accused person as a deserter. Counsel is of the view that since the there is no evidence that accused person’s next of kin was contacted, the prosecution has failed to prove its case. Counsel however in did not provide the court with any law or regulation that outlined the procedure to follow in cases of desertion against a police officer. To this court, the law is that a police officer who is absent without authority for a continuous period of twenty-one days or more shall, unless the contrary is proved, be presumed to have deserted. Indeed, there is no dispute that accused person absent himself from duty for more than five (5) months without authorization. This court is of the considered opinion that even though it is desirable for the prosecution to have tendered the reports *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 16 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* on the efforts made to locate whereabouts of the accused person, the failure to do so in the instant case is not fatal to the prosecution's case. Besides, it must be noted that contacting accused person’s next of kin listed in the duplicate record of service would not necessarily lead to locating whereabouts of the accused person if the accused person did not inform any of his relatives or next of kin before he traveled to a place known to him alone. Be that as it may, there is evidence on record that “Preliminary investigation within the vicinity indicated he left with his wife who is also a Policewoman and their whereabouts was not known”, which has not been challenged by accused person or his lawyer. 22. Furthermore, the accused person claims he was not of himself or was confused due to depression disorder but stated he traveled to Swedru to see a local herbalist for treatment. He admitted he was away for five months without permission. He also admitted that he went for the local treatment alone. Some questions to ask are as follows: how can accused person who claims he was not in his right senses traveled alone from Bolgatanga to Swedru for treatment? What period did the accused use for the treatment? Was the accused person receiving the treatment throughout the whole five months he was away? Is the accused person saying throughout the time he was away he did not come to his senses to contact his superiors directly or through his relatives to inform them about his whereabouts? The inference that could be drawn in answer to the above questions is that the accused has the like intention of remaining permanently absent from duty without proper authority. 23. It is for the foregoing reasons that this court finds the explanation of the accused person unacceptable or not reasonably probable and holds that he absented *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 17 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* himself from post or duty for more than twenty-one (21) days or about five and half months without authorisation or permission with the like intention of remaining permanently. Conclusion 24. Having examined the whole evidence of the prosecution and Defence on record, this court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution has discharged its burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt regarding the charge of Desertion against the accused person. Thus, the ingredients of the offence of Desertion were proved beyond reasonable doubt. In other words, apart from the defence’s explanation, this court is satisfied on a consideration of the whole evidence that the accused person is guilty of Desertion. The accused person is hereby found guilty of Desertion and convicted accordingly. Mitigation of Sentence 25. Counsel for the Accused Person: We pray that the accused person be dealt with leniently. For the past two years, the accused person has not been on salary. The court should take judicial notice of the economy, in that if someone is not on salary for two years, it is very difficult to make ends meet. Even though we pray for a non-custodian sentence, the minimal amount of fine will be difficult for the accused person to pay. In the circumstances, a caution and discharge will be a *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 18 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* suitable punishment. Now he has lost his job completely. It means he has to take other steps to look for another work. We pray accordingly. Prosecution: We have nothing to say. Sentence 26. Some of the principles that govern sentencing are: the seriousness of the offence, the premeditation with which the criminal plan was executed, the prevalence of the crime within the locality in particular and the country in general, the degree of revulsion felt by the law abiding citizens of the society, mitigating circumstances such as extreme youth, first offender and good character. See the cases of Kwashie v The Republic [1971]1 GLR 488, Adu Boahene v The Republic [1972]1 GLR 70, and Kamil v The Republic [2011] SCGLR 300. 27. Section 24(1) of the Police Service Act, 1970 (Act 350) provides that a police officer who deserts commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred penalty units or to imprisonment not exceeding three months, or to both fine and the imprisonment. And now therefore, considering the circumstances of this case, plea of the counsel for accused person for mercy or leniency, the fact that the accused person is a first time offender, the general overcrowding in the prisons; and being guided by Ghana Sentencing Guidelines as well as principles governing sentencing; the Accused person is hereby sentenced pay a fine of one hundred (100) penalty units and in default three (3) months imprisonment with hard labour. *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 19 of 20 *HWMNJ@DC/BLG-26/02/2025* (SGD) H/W MAWUKOENYA NUTEKPOR (DISTRICT MAGISTRATE) *JUDGMENT-THE REPUBLIC VRS. BISMARK BONNEY (CASE NO. B18/37/2024)* Page 20 of 20