Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
July 27, 2023
DISTRICT COURT
GHANA
CORAM
JUDGMENT
1. In this case, accused is charged as follows:
STATEMENT OF OFFENCE
Stealing, contrary to section 124(1) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29).
PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE
Elham Abdellah, Unemployed, Age 25years: In the month of April, 2022 at Tamale
in the Northern Magisterial District and within the jurisdiction of this Court, did
steal cash sum of GHS7,690.00 the property of Mohammed Said Arafa.
FACTS OF THE CASE
2. The facts of the case as tersely given by the prosecution are that in January, 2022 the
complainant and his Egyptian brothers employed the accused as a sales girl, who
distributes goods to customers on credit and collects the money later for the
complainant. During the month of March, 2022 accused was found to have collected
cash sum of GHS300.00 from some customers but failed to pay same to the
complainant. A complaint was lodged to the police where accused person’s family
paid the said money was paid and accused stopped working. Thereafter, complainant
visited the customers who bought goods on credit from the accused and he detected
that accused collected monies to the tune GHS7,690.00 from 70 customers but failed
to pay same to complainant. On 9th May, 2022 a complaint was lodged again to the
police and accused was arrested. During interrogation, the accused admitted the
offence and pleaded for time to pay, but failed to do so.
3. Accused when arraigned before this court on the above charge pleaded not guilty.
DEFINITION OF THE OFFENCE
4. Section 125 of Act 29 defines stealing to mean, “a person steals if he dishonestly
appropriates a thing of which he is not the owner.” Act 29 also provides that a person
who steals commits a second degree felony, see s. 124(1).
BURDEN OF PROOF
5. By a plea of not guilty, the accused puts himself in charge of the court, meaning that
his guilt has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. It is settled law that a person is
presumed innocent until the contrary proved, see article 19(2)(c) of the 1992
Constitution. The mandatory requirement that the guilt of the person charged ought
to be established beyond reasonable doubt and the burden of persuasion on the party
claiming that the person was guilty, has been provided for in ss. 11(2), 13(1), 15 and
22 of Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323). In Gligah & Atiso v The Republic [2010]
SCGLR 870, the Supreme Court, per Dotse JSC re-emphasized this point thus:
“…whenever an accused person is arraigned before any court in
AI Generated Summary
The Magistrate’s Court in Tamale tried Elham Abdellah, a 25‑year‑old former sales girl employed by Mohammed El Said Arafa and his Egyptian brothers, for stealing under Act 29 section 124(1). The prosecution alleged she failed to remit GHS7,690 collected from 70 customers, after an earlier incident involving GHS300 that was repaid by her family. PW1 described her role distributing goods on credit and later collections; PW2 testified Abdellah admitted receiving GHS2,215 from 28 customers and issuing receipts, but no receipt books or customer statements were tendered, and market women did not testify. Abdellah pleaded not guilty and claimed record loss. Applying the burden-of-proof and the principle that proof of part suffices, the court found the prosecution failed to prove GHS7,690 but proved GHS2,220. Abdellah was convicted, fined 150 penalty units (five months’ imprisonment in default), and ordered to compensate Arafa GHS2,220.