REPUBLIC VS ROSALINE OWUSU BROWN
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE MARY M.E YANZUH
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Evidence Law
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The prosecution charged Rosaline Owusu Brown with conspiracy to commit forgery and forgery of official documents. The essential issue was whether the documents were legal or official. The court concluded that the documents, Power of Attorney and Vesting Assent, were legal, not official documents. This distinction was crucial as the prosecution had charged Rosaline with forgery of official documents. Upon evaluating the evidence, the court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case, thus acquitting and discharging Rosaline on all counts.
Section 173 of the Criminal and other Offences Procedure Act 1960 Act 30 provides that: “Where at the close of the evidence in support of the charge, it appears to the court that a case is not made out against the accused sufficiently to require the accused to make a defence, the court shall as to that particular charge, acquit the accused”The prosecution charged the accused person with two counts of conspiracy to commit crime namely forgery of official document contrary to Sections 23(1) and 158 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 Act 29, and a further two counts of forgery of official document contrary to Section 158 of Act 29. The said charge sheet upon which the accused person was arraigned was filed on the 27th of March 2019. The accused person pleaded not guilty to all the counts after same were read and explained to her in the Twi language.
FACTS OF THE CASE According to the prosecution, the complainant Doris Owusu Brown is a trader and resident at East Legon while the accused person Rosaline Owusu Brown is a businesswoman and resident at Dansoman.
The prosecution states that the complainant is a widow, whose deceased husband died sometime in the year 2000. The deceased was survived by seven children including the accused person.
The deceased died intestate and in his Will appointed two of the complainant’s step children, one Edmund Isaac Owusu Brown and Winifred Owusu Brown, who are both resident in the United Kingdom as his Executors.
The prosecution states that during the subsistence of the marriage the deceased gifted to the complainant a landed property at East Legon, which she later developed into a residence.
The case of the prosecution continues that sometime in 2012, one Adum Acheampong filed a suit in the High Court against the Complainant in respect of the said residence and among other reliefs sought was a refund of monies paid to the complainant as rent for a room in the complainant’s residence at East Legon.
Subsequently, the two named executors, Edmund Isaac Owusu Brown and Winifred Owusu Brown were joined to the said suit as co-defendants.
The prosecution states that the accused person who claimed to be representing the two executors in the suit presented to the court a power of attorney as issued jointly by the two executors who are both resident in the United Kingdom.
The accused person during the trial again tendered as exhibit a Vesting Assent purportedly signed by the two named executors in respect of landed properties of