Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT
1. The accused persons in this case have been charged with the below offence:
STATEMENT OF OFFENCE
Assault: Contrary to section 84 of the Criminal Offences Act 29/60.
PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE
KONJING FUSEINA, aged 34yrs, unemployed and FULINJU ERICA, aged 28yrs,
teacher: For that on 6
th May, 2022 at about 8:00pm at Jonshegu in the Northern
Region and within the jurisdiction of this court, did unlawfully assault one Janet
Awudu.
FACTS OF THE CASE
2. The brief facts of the case as narrated by prosecution are that the complainant, Janet
Awudu is married to Mr. Maxwell Fulinja Dambe who is the brother of the accused
persons herein. The complainant at the time of this incident was pregnant. On the said
6/5/22 at about 8:00pm the accused person visited their brother who had been
involved in a motor accident and was nursing his injuries at home. However, on that
day the husband had left to visit a brother who was also involved in the said accident.
So, when accused persons were approaching complainant’s matrimonial home, they
sighted complainant locking the gate. After knocking severally on the gate and no one
coming to open it, accused persons then called their brother and complained about
what complainant had done. Their brother on returning from his outing opened the
gate for them to enter. Accused persons then picked up an argument with the
complainant. The argument degenerated into a fight causing injury to the
complainant. Complainant then reported the matter to DOVVSU, Tamale and a
medical form was issued. On return of the medical report, accused persons were
arrested. Accused persons, however, denied having assaulted the complainant. After
investigations, accused persons were charged with assault and arraigned before this
court.
DEFINITION OF THE OFFENCE
3. Section 84 of Act 29 provides that a person who unlawfully assaults any person
commits a misdemeanour.
BURDEN OF PROOF
4. 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. 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).
Significantly, whereas the prosecution carries that burden to prove the guilt of the
accused beyond reasonable doubt, there