REPUBLIC VRS AMADU (3/01/2025) [2025] GHADC 37 (21 February 2025)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT DAMBAI ON FRIDAY 21ST FEBRUARY 2025 BEFORE HIS WORSHIP ALHASSAN DRAMAN, ESQ. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CASE NO: 3/01/2025 THE REPUBLIC VRS MOHAMMED AMADU ACCUSED PERSON PRESENT COMPLAINANT PRESENT C/INSPECTOR S. K. GAVOR FOR THE PROSECUTION PRESENT JUDGEMENT The accused person is charged with the offence of causing harm contrary to section 69 of the criminal and other offences Act 1960 (Act29). The accused person pleaded not guilty to the charge against him after the charge have been read out and explained to him. THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTION The facts of the case as presented by the prosecution were that the complainant is a farmer and also father and uncle of victims Vincent Opabi and Godwin Kofi respectively whilst accused is a herdsman at Tokoroano. On 01/03/2024 victims Vincent Opabi age 13 years and Godwin Kofi age 9 years respectively were sent with a bicycle by the complainant to get some tubers of yam from their farm situate near the police barrier. On reaching a spot around Ntiseri on the main Dambai Katanga High way, victims’ claim the accused who was herding cattle throw a stick against the tyre of their bicycle causing them to fall on the tarred road. The victims sustained injuries on their forehead and face respectively. A certain driver by name “fire” came to their rescue and took them home. On same day the complainant brought the victims to the station and a complaint was lodge. The victims were issued with medical forms and they attended the EP clinic where they were treated and discharged. On 13/08/2024 victim Vincent Opabi led the police to Ntiseri and identified the accused to the police as the culprit. The accused reported himself to the police on 27/08/2024. In his caution statement the accused denied the offence. He was charged with the offence after investigation and is before this court. The prosecution in proving its case called four (4) witnesses including the investigator. PW1, who is the complainant confirmed the facts as presented by the prosecution. PW2, Vincent Opabi told the court per his witness statement filed on 06/01/2025 that on 01/03/2024 he and his cousin Godwin Kofi were sent by his father (complainant) to go to the farm and bring some tubers of yam home for the use of the family. According to PW2 when they got to the farm they met some Fulani herdsmen there including the accused who begged them for some tubers of yam but they told them that they could not give them the yam without the consent of complainant. PW2 said whilst on their way home with the yam they again met the accused and his colleagues at the Ntiseri hill towards Tokoroano with their cattle crossing the road. PW2 added that whilst they were riding on their bicycle the accused threw a stick against the bicycle tyre and they fell down. According to PW2 he sustained injury on his forehead whilst his cousin also sustained some injuries. PW2 stated that they were found by a certain driver who took them home and their father took them to the Police Station where he lodged a complaint and they were given a Police Medical Form to attend hospital which he returned to the Police duly endorsed by the Medical Officer. PW3 Godwin Kofi told the court that on that fateful day, he was riding on a bicycle with PW2 when the accused threw his stick against the tire of their bicycle and the fell down. PW3 said they both sustained injuries but one driver by name “fire” saw them and convey them home. According to PW3 the complainant took them to the Police Station where they lodged a complaint and were issued with medical form to attend hospital. PW4 (investigator) subsequently tendered in evidence the cautioned and charge statements of the accused person, photographs of the medical forms of the victims as well as photographs of the (PW2 and PW3) depicting the injuries they sustained and same marked as Exhibits “A”, “B”, “C”, “D”, “E”, and “F” respectively without any objection. Thereafter, the prosecution closed its case. THE CASE OF THE DEFENCE The accused person in opening his defence testified himself and called two witnesses and tendered no exhibit in evidence. The accused person told the court that he was not working at Tokoroano when the incident happened. According to accused as at the time the incident occurred, he was working as a herdsman for one Alhaji Zakaria who has his Kraal at Yariga. The accused said he does not know the victims and has never throw a stick against the bicycle of the victims. The accused told the court that he started working as a herdsman at Tokoroano with Osman Abubakari in August and it was barely a week when the police arrested him. DW1 was Osman Abubakar. He told the court that he is a cattle farmer at Tokoroano and the accused is one of his herdsmen. According to DW1 the accused started working for him from August 2024. DW1 stated that the accused was not living or working in Tokoroano in March 2024 when the alleged harm was caused to the complainant’s children. DW1 added that it could not have been the accused who caused the harm to the victims since he was not in Tokoroano in March, 2024. DW2 was Alhassan Iddrisa he told the court that he is a cattle farmer and has a joint kraal with his brother Alhaji Zakaria at Yariga near Dambai. DW2 said the accused was once a herdsman for him and his brother. According to DW2 the accused worked for them between 26th June 2023 and 25th June, 2024. He said at the time the alleged offence is said to have been committed, the accused was herding their cattle at Yariga and therefore could not have been the same person who caused the harm to the victims at Tokoroano. Thereafter, the defence closed its case. The legal issue to be determined by this court is: i. Whether or not the accused person caused harm to PW1 and PW2. The cardinal rule in all criminal proceedings is that the burden of establishing the guilt of the accused is on the prosecution; and the standard of proof required by the prosecution should be proof beyond reasonable doubt as provided in the Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323), sections 11(2) and 13 (1), and also as was stated in the case of Donkor v. The State [1964] GLR 598. Likewise the case of Republic v District Magistrate Grade II, Osu; Ex parte Yahaya [1984 – 86] 2 GLR 361 – 365, where Brobbey J. (as he then was) stated and I quote: “One of the cardinal principles of criminal law in this country is that when an accused person pleads not guilty, his conviction must be based on evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt.” Section 69 of Act 29 provides: “A person who intentionally and unlawfully causes harm to any other person commits a second degree felony”. The accused person has been consistent with his denial that he was not the one who caused the harm to PW1 and PW2. In his caution statement dated 27/08/2024 the accused stated as follows: “…I did not throw any stick at the complainant’s children. I was not even living in Tokoroano during the time of the incident (01/03/2024). By then I was working for one Alhaji Ganli who resides at Dambai and his kraal is at Yariga No.1. I moved to Tokoroano to work for Alhaji Osman Abubakar about one week ago. The day the child came to point at me was my third day of working for Alhaji Osman. Again when the accused came under cross examination by prosecution on 24/01/2025 he maintained that he did not know the victims and was nowhere near Tokoroano on the day of the incident. Below was what transpired. Q. You told this court that you are a herdsman not so. A. Yes. Q. At where. A. Tokoroano. Q. Whose cattle do you take care of. A. Alhaji Osman. Q. Since when did you start working for Alhaji Osman. A. About six months now. Q. I put it to you that on the 1st March, 2024 you and your colleagues met the victims in their farm at Tokoroano and you begged them for yam but they refused to give you. A. That is not true. On the 1st March I was in Yariga and not Tokoroano so I never met the victims on that fateful day let alone to beg for yam Q. I further put it to you that later that day you again met the victims on a bicycle on their way home and without any provocation you throw a stick against the bicycle and they fell down and sustained injuries. A. I don’t know what you are talking about. I never met the children. I don’t know them and I did not throw a stick at their bicycle. Q. I further put it to you that the case was reported to the police and you were invited. A. That is true but when I went to the police station I denied the offence leveled against me. From the above encounter the accused has been resolute and consistent in his denial of the charge and was not shaken by the rigorous cross examination by prosecution. DW1 and DW2 also corroborated the testimony of the accused that he was not in Tokoroano when the incident occurred. DW1 stated that he engaged the services of the accused in August, 2024 whilst DW2 said he started working with the accused from 26/11/20233 to 25/06/2024 and that his kraal is at Yariga and not at Tokoroano where the incident occurred. From the evidence on record there is no doubt that the victims (PW1 and PW2) sustained some injuries. For instance, exhibits “C” and “D” (medical forms) which were duly endorsed by Patrick Lotsu, a Principal Physician Assistant at the Tokoroano Health center are emphatic that PW1 and PW2 sustained injuries. Exhibit “C” read in part as follows: “A 12 year old boy with abrasion close to the nx eye seen.” Exhibit “D” also read in part as follows: “A nine year old boy seen with laceration on the forehead and abrasion at the nt side of the right eye.” Equally important are Exhibits “E” and “F” (photographs) showing the injuries sustained by the victims. It is the law that in every criminal trial it is not only necessary for the prosecution to prove the commission of a crime but also to lead evidence to identify the accused as the person or persons who committed the crime. See the case of Razak and Yamoah v The Republic (2012)2 SCGLR 750. It is significant to state that when the incident happened on the 1st March, 2024, the accused person was not immediately arrest till 25th August 2024 when PW1 was taken to the house of the accused and he pointed out the accused as the one who caused the harm to him and PW2. This was about six months after the incident occurred. There is no evidence explaining what occasioned this long delay in apprehending the accused. It is also worth noting that per the account of PW1 and PW2 on that fateful day they met two herdsmen and it was one of these two men who throw his stick against their bicycle tire and they fell down leading to their injuries. In my respectful view, considering the length of time between the incident and the arrest of the accused it is most likely than not that PW1 made a wrongful identification of the accused. From the totality of the evidence on record I am of the considered view that the accused has raised serious doubts in the case of prosecution. In the case of Dexter Johnson v. The Republic [2011] SCGLR 601, Dotse JSC had this to say about the standard of proof in criminal matters and I quote: “Our system of criminal justice is predicated on the principle of the prosecution, proving the facts in issue against an accused person beyond all reasonable doubt. This has been held in several cases to mean that, whenever any doubts exist in the mind of the court which has the potential to result in a substantial miscarriage of justice, those doubts must be resolved in favour of the accused person”. The learned judge continued and I quote: “I believe this principle must have informed William Blackstone’s often quoted statement that ‘Better than ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer’ which was quoted and relied upon by me in the unanimous decision of this court in the case of Republic vrs Acquaye alias Abor Yamoah II, ex-parte Essel and Others [2009] SCGLR 749 @ 750”. In line with the above and considering the authorities listed above, I find that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, against the accused and so the accused person herein, Mohammed Amadu is hereby acquitted and discharged. SGD H/W ALHASSAN DRAMANI DISTRICT MAGISTRATE 21ST FEBRUARY, 2025.