REPUBLIC v. DISTRICT COURT MAGISTRATE GRADE I, TEMA; EX PARTE AKOTIAH AND OTHERS

In the High Court, Agyepong J. considered an application by several accused persons to quash and prohibit a private prosecution commenced in the District Court Grade I, Tema, alleging conspiracy to steal and stealing the corpse of Nene Dake II, the Ada Mantse. The applicants argued, among other grounds, that private prosecution was impermissible where the Attorney-General or police declined to prosecute, that a corpse could not be the subject of stealing, that the information disclosed no triable offence, and that the magistrate had made findings without their appearance. The judge held that Act 30 permits private prosecution without the Attorney-General’s fiat and that a corpse may be the subject of stealing under Act 29, supported by Sam v. The State and public policy. However, because stealing is a second-degree felony, the District Court lacked summary jurisdiction absent the Attorney-General’s opinion under Act 372 s.39(1)(b), particularly as the police had declined prosecution. He found the summons and warrants valid under s.60(2), but allowed the application on the sole ground of want of jurisdiction, quashed the proceedings, prohibited further hearing, and awarded costs of ¢50.