THE REPUBLIC v. DORIS DONKOR

The accused person herein was arraigned before this Court, charged with two

counts of Assault contrary to section 84 of the Criminal Code, 1960 (Act 29) and

Causing Unlawful Damage contrary to section 172 the Criminal Code, 1960 (Act

29. She pleaded not guilty to the charges.

The facts of the case per the charge sheet and as presented by the prosecution

are that on 02/08/22, the complainant came to the station and made a case of

assault and causing damage against the accused. Police medical form was

issued to the complainant to attend hospital for treatment and returned same

well endorsed by the medical officer. Police visited the scene of crime and took

photographs of the damaged items for evidential purposes. Police made

multiples efforts to get the accused arrested but to no avail. On 27/09/22 accused

was arrested and investigation established that the complainant bought

quantities of mango from the accused on credit. The complainant gradually paid

for the items leaving a balance of GH¢60.00. On 02/08/22, the accused person

visited the complainant at home for the rest of the money and the complainant

gave her GH¢10.00. The accused became offended and held the shirts of the

complainant after collecting the money. Complainant struggled to free herself

from the accused person and in the process, the accused person pushed the

complainant. The complainant fell on her two plastic chairs together with two

mini radio and three bottles of locally manufactured medicines leading to the

damages caused by the accused. Investigation cautioned statement was

obtained from the accused. After investigation, the accused person was charged

with the offences as stated on the charge sheet and arraigned before this court.

The prosecution called two witnesses in a bid to prove the charges as stated

above. Those called were Elizabeth Mensah the complainant as PW1 and the

investigator as PW2 respectively. I have considered in detail the evidences of all

the witnesses for the prosecution and I do not deem it fit to relay extensively

their evidence. I shall however, make references to them in the course of my

analysis of the evidence.

When the prosecution closed its case, the accused was invited to open her

defence. Accused gave evidence in her defence and called one other witness.

Her evidence was largely a denial of the allegation of assault and unlawful

damage levelled against her. She stated to the effect that even though she went

to PW1 to de