THE REPUBLIC v. DAVID DORNYO

BACKGROUND

On 12th of February,2019, the accused person was arraigned before this Court on a charge

of causing unlawful damage contrary to section 172 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960

(Act 29).

BRIEF FACTS

The brief facts attached by the prosecution disclosed that the complainant Xede Lovi and

the accused David Dornyo are farmers, cousins and neighbours who both reside at Kuli

in the Ketu North Municipality.

The Prosecution stated that sometime in March, 2017 the complainant erected a structure

for his use as a kitchen made up of wood and palm branches roofed with aluminum

sheets very close to the bedroom of the accused.

The Prosecution stated that the accused complained about the location of the structure

due to smoke from the kitchen entering his room, the inconvenience it was causing to the

positioning of his Television antenna and the possibility of rain water from the roof of the

kitchen causing damage to the foundation of his mud building.

The Prosecution stated that as a result of the complainant’s refusal to yield to the concerns

of the accused, the accused reported the matter to Torgbui Avorkliya of Kuli who

summoned both parties and after having listened to them and visiting the site advised

the complainant to reposition his kitchen structure.

The prosecution stated that the complainant failed to comply with the directives, causing

the accused to remove and reposition the structure and upon his dissatisfaction with the

action of the accused reported the matter to the police.

THE CASE OF PROSECUTION

The prosecution relied on the evidence of the complainant Xedey Lovi and the police

investigator Detective Sergeant Edward Quansah as the second prosecution witness

(PW2).

In his evidence in chief PW1 stated that on the 1st of March, 2016 he put up a roofing

structure to prevent the rains from destroying the items in his kitchen but the accused in

his absence destroyed the structure on 27th April, 2016.

PW1 stated that while the accused was in the process of causing damage to his structure,

he confronted him to know the reason behind his conduct but he threatened him with a

cutlass and a pinch bar he was holding.

PW1 stated that he reported the matter to the police who visited the scene and took

photographs of the damage caused.

PW1 stated that he confronted the accused about the development but he declined to

speak on the matter so he reported him to the police.

In his evidence in support of the case of Prosecutio