ARTHUR v. THE REPUBLIC
April 14, 1976
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- SARKODEE J
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Evidence Law
April 14, 1976
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT OF SARKODEE J.
In this appeal against the judgment of the District Court Grade I, Tarkwa, the accused then aged 22 years was convicted of the charge of assault on a girl and was sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment with hard labour.
Beatrice Cudjoe, a dental nurse, lived with her daughter then aged three years at the hospital quarters, Tarkwa. The accused, a co-tenant, used to visit the house of Beatrice Cudjoe and play with her and her daughter. At about 12.30 p.m. on 30 October 1975, Beatrice was at the dental clinic with her daughter when the accused went to her and with the knowledge of Beatrice took the child away. The accused returned the child to her mother at about 12.45 p.m. just when Beatrice had closed from work and was about to go home. She immediately went home with her daughter. Soon after they had reached home the child told her mother she would go to the toilet. The mother gave her a chamber pot on which she sat; she then called her mother and told her she was bleeding from the anus. Her mother examined her and found blood in her pants; she saw blood oozing out of her vagina. The mother asked the child what had happened to her and she answered: "That the accused had inserted his finger into her vagina and that accused had promised her toffee if she would not tell me of that." The mother immediately took the child to the hospital and at 1.30 pm. the doctor took the child to the theatre repaired a broken hymen and treated a contusion of the outer entrance of the urinal tract; the outer part of which was swollen and bulging. He then admitted the child for five days. Immediately after the treatment at the theatre the mother reported the case to the police who then arrested and charged the accused.
Three main grounds of appeal were argued, namely:
"(1) The evidence of the case does not support the offence charged.
[p.253]
(2) The learned trial magistrate erred in admitting the evidence of the first prosecution witness and relying on it solely to convict the accused.
(3) The sentence of eighteen months' imprisonment with hard labour is excessive."
In support of the first ground learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in an assault charge the substitution of the name of the person alleged to have been assaulted by a different name makes the charge bad, and that this is so fundamental as to throw out the charge. Learned counsel went on, it is not a mere technicality and cannot be cured by evidence. He concluded tha
AI Generated Summary
This appeal, decided by Sarkodee J., concerns the District Court Grade I, Tarkwa, conviction of co‑tenant Thomas Assuah Arthur for assaulting three‑year‑old Comfort Larbi, daughter of dental nurse Beatrice Cudjoe. Arthur took Comfort from the dental clinic and returned her minutes later; at home, Beatrice discovered bleeding. A doctor repaired Comfort’s torn hymen, treated contusions, and admitted her for five days. On appeal, Arthur argued that the charge misnamed the victim, that the magistrate wrongly admitted Beatrice’s account of Comfort’s complaint and relied upon it, and that the sentence was excessive. The court held that misdescription of the victim in the particulars did not invalidate a charge that otherwise stated a triable offence, and that complaint evidence was inadmissible because Comfort did not testify. Nevertheless, Arthur’s statement and the timing and nature of Comfort’s fresh injuries constituted compelling circumstantial evidence, and no substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred. The conviction was affirmed, but the sentence was varied to a fine of ¢200 with default imprisonment and ¢150 compensation to Beatrice.