REPUBLIC VRS ALI & ANOTHER (UE/BG/CT/B1/66/2022) [2024] GHACC 190 (19 March 2024)

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT HELD AT BOLGATANGA IN THE UPPER EAST REGION ON TUESDAY THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE HIS HONOUR SUMAILA MBACHE AHMADU (CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE). CASE NO. UE/BG/CT/B1/66/2022 THE REPUBLIC VS 1. SULEMANA ALI 2. HAMIDU YUSSIF JUDGEMENT The accused persons are charged on three counts, one count on Conspiracy to commit crime to wit, Robbery; contrary to sections 23 (1) and 149 of the criminal and other offences Act 1960, ACT 29. And two counts on Robbery; contrary to section 149 of act 1960 (ACT 29). The accused persons denied both counts. THE CASE FOR THE PROSECUTION. On 2/6/2022 about 10:am, victim Asibit Mbugri picked his younger brother- Ndago Mbugri on the said motorbike and set off from Temonde to Nalerigu, where victim Ndago Mbugri bought an unregistered wine color Yamaha Scooter motorbike at GHc6,000.00 from his friend called Emmanuel Abdulai a witness in this case; in the presence of one Wadudu. Same day around 5:00pm, the victims rode their motorbikes and set off from Nalerigu enroute to Zebilla. On reaching a section of the road closer to Azimmbase village, along the Garu-Binduri road, A1 and A2 who were wielding a cutlass and an AK47 rifles respectively, together with four others who were also armed with AK 47 rifles and are currently at large, emerged from a nearby bush. The armed 1 men attacked the victims at gunpoint and robbed them of the above-mentioned motorbikes, one (1) Techno Camon 12 mobile phone, one (1) Samsung A plus mobile phone, one (1) Samsung Galaxy A32 mobile phone all valued GH₵24,200.00, and also cash the sum of GH₵1,232.00. The robbers subsequently subjected the victims to beatings and after that ordered them to lie on the ground in prostate position. After some time after, a man who had picked a woman on a red royal motorbike incidentally also fell victim and was robbed of the said royal motorbike also at gunpoint. The robbers ordered them to also lie in the prostrate position, and handed the said royal motorbike to victims Ndago Mbugri and Asibit Mbugri and instructed them to ride away towards the direction of Binduri. Victim Ndago Mbugri and his brother rode the royal motorbike to the Avondago police station, under Binduri District, and lodged a complaint to the police. Victim Ndago Mbugri and his brother later led a night police patrol team to the scene of crime but the robbers were not met. The victims called and informed Emmanuel Abdulai about the incident. On 3/6/2022 around 9:00am, Wadudu spotted A1 and A2 riding a white Haojue motorbike and the black Yamaha scooter motorbike respectively to the Nalerigu. The said Wadudu informed the police, together with the exhibit motorbikes. The number plate of the white Haojue motorbikes had been removed A1 and A2 were handed over to the Bawku District police assist in the investigations. In their respective investigation cautioned statements, the accused persons denied the offences. The prosecution in support of its case called two witnesses; Ndago Mbugri (PW1) and NO 47486, D/CLP Opoku Boakye (PW2) the investigator who tendered in evidence EXHIBITS A -K. 2 THE CASE OF THE DEFENCE. A1 in his defense says he bought the motorbike the subject of the crime from on Bukari who is his friend at Sakoogu a village under Nalerigu and that he did not know its was a stolen property and he did not participate in the robbery. A2 on his part says he called A1 the accompany to go and buy a motorbike and that when got there A1 bought a white haojin motorbike from Bukari and he bought a wine Yamaha scooter motorbike from a friend of Bukari. That he did know it was a stolen motorbike and that he did not take part in the robbery. BURDEN OF PROOF. This been a criminal case the prosecution bears the burden of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt per sections 11 (1) and 13 (1) of evidence act 1975, NRCD 323. INGREDIENTS OF CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT CRIME, AND ROBBERY. In the case FRIMPONG ALIAS IBOMAN V. THE REPUBLIC [2012]1 SCGLR 297, the elements of Conspiracy involved two or more agreeing to act together. Robbery are that; the appellant stole something from victim of the robbery of which he is not the owner, that in stealing the thing, the appellant used force, harm or threat of any criminal assault on the victims, that the intention of doing so was to prevent or overcome the resistance, that this fear of violence must either be of personal violence to the person robbed or to any member of his household or family in a restrictive sense, the thing stolen must be in the presence of the person threatened. ANALYSIS AND APPLICATION OF THE LAW. From the evidence adduced before the court PW1, Ndago Mbugri says on 2/6/2022 at about 5:00 pm he and one Asibit Mbugri were on their motorbikes from Nalerigu to Temonde and reaching Azimbasi A1, A2 and four other persons attacked them and took 3 the two motorbikes, Tecno Camon 12 mobile phone, Samsum A plus mobile phone and cash of GH₵932 from him. That he A1 holding a cutlass and A2 hold an AK 47 assault rifle. Pw1 and Asibit later positively identified A1 and A2 in an identification parade as part of the persons who robbed them off their properties when the accused persons were arrested with the motorbikes. The motorbikes were stolen on the 2/6/2022 and the accused persons were seen riding them towards Tamale ostensibly to dispose of them on the 3/6/2022 and claiming to have bought them from one Bukari and his friend whom they could not lead police to. IN ADU BOAHENE V THE REPUBLIC [1972] 1GLR 70. The court states that; where the identity of an accused person is issue, there can be no better proof of his identity than the evidence of a witness who swears to have seen the accused committing the offence charged. In the instant case PW1 one of victims swore that he saw the accused persons and four others where A1 held a cutlass and A2 welding an AK 47. The victims were able to identify the accused persons because there was day light at the time of the robbery. Under cross examination PW1 stated as follows; Q. By A1- When you said you know me, where do you know me? A. A2 gave three shots and I stopped, after I stopped, they instructed I lie down and asked me to open the boot of the motorbike and took me to the bush and beat over an hour and I got to see you there. Q. By A2- Did you know before or you got to know me on the day of the arrest? A. It was the night of the robbery that I got to know you. You were holding the gun. In view of the overwhelming evidence against the accused persons, I hold that the prosecution has proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt and hereby convict the 4 accused persons as charged. Accused persons are sentenced to 15 years each on count one and 18 years each on count two and three to run concurrently. HIS HONOUR SUMAILA MBACHE AHMADU (CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE). 5