Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
October 17, 1967
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
JUDGMENT OF AMISSAH J.A.
The appellant in this case was convicted of assault upon the complainant, the wife of his neighbour. There was a second charge of causing damage to the complainant's spectacles upon which he was also convicted. The prosecution's case which the court accepted, was that prior to the day of the incident, relations had become strained between the neighbours. There was a hedge which separated their two properties. It had a hole in it. The appellant sought to block it. The complainant and her husband, taking the view that the hedge was wholly within their property objected to the appellant's interference with it. Heated arguments between the [p.613] parties on either side of the hedge occurred over the rival claims. On the day of the incident, the complainant's husband had got someone to remove the barriers erected by the appellant blocking the openings in the hedge. But this man had been stopped by the appellant. When the complainant's husband returned from work he found this assignment uncompleted and he went to do it himself. The appellant saw him and tried to stop him. An argument ensued which was joined in by some members of the households of the men involved.
The appellant is a doctor practising at Tema Hospital. In the course of the argument, the complainant according to the prosecution said to the appellant that certain nurses had said that he had been misbehaving at the hospital. This apparently was too much for the appellant to bear because upon hearing it, he jumped over to the complainant's side of the hedge and gave her a slap which resulted in her spectacles falling off and breaking.
The appellant did not substantially dispute that there had been quarrels over the hedge. But he disputed the assault in the form of the slap. According to him the quarrel between the two neighbouring houses on the material day began before he got home from work. A crowd had gathered to watch it. Upon arrival he went to the scene of the trouble and was hit by a stone thrown presumably from the other side. When the complainant saw him coming she started towards her house. As she turned a corner into her sitting room she slipped and fell at the door. He did not slap the complainant and it was not directly as a result of his action that her glasses dropped.
In both the prosecution and the defence stories the presence of one Mr. Woode at the scene at the time was mentioned. The appellant said that when he came home, this Mr. Woode, a visitor,
AI Generated Summary
This appeal arises from a neighbourhood dispute in which the appellant, a doctor at Tema Hospital, confronted his neighbours over a hedge separating the properties. After the neighbour sought to remove barriers the appellant had installed, a quarrel escalated. The prosecution’s narrative was that the complainant told the appellant nurses said he had misbehaved at the hospital, provoking him to jump the hedge and slap her, breaking her spectacles. The defence maintained there was no slap; the complainant ran, slipped at her doorway, and her glasses fell. Both sides referred to an eyewitness, Mr. Woode of Kaiser Engineers, but he was not called. The appellate judge reaffirmed the prosecution’s duty to present all relevant evidence and the court’s discretion to call material witnesses, noting the failure to call Mr. Woode might have been decisive. Yet the court held that, even absent battery, the appellant’s own admissions established assault without battery under section 87(1), affirming both convictions but substituting caution and discharge for the sentences.