THE REPUBLIC v. AKAKPO KPEGLO

JUDGMENT

The accused person was charged with one count of cruelty to animal contrary to section

302(1a) of Act 29/60.

The brief facts attached to the charge are that Complainant in this case Ayisi Samuel

aged 56 is a farmer whiles the accused person Akakpo Kpeglo aged 42 is also a farmer

and both reside at Begoro. For some time now accused person has been killing the

complainant’s pigs for no apparent reason. On 27th day of June, 2022 at about 6:00pm,

complainant realized that two of his pigs valued GHȼ 1,600.00 have been butchered by

the accused person. A report was made to Police and accused person was arrested.

During interrogation, accused person admitted killing the said pigs with cutlass for

destroying his house. However, he intimated that the pigs normally comes to his house

and dig out a hole under his building and caused damage to his Bio-Digester toilet hence

his action. Accused person after killing the pigs, he threw one of the carcass into a public

toilet at the back of his house. After investigations, accused person was charged with the

offence as contained in the charge sheet before this court.

The accused appeared before the Court on 3rd August, 23 and when the charge was read

and explained to him, he pleaded Not Guilty to the charge.

The evidential burden was therefore on prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable

doubt required by law.

EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE ADDUCED AND APPLICATION OF LAW

Under Section 13 (1) of the Evidence Act, 1975, (NRCD 323), prosecution has to

prove its case against the accused person beyond reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt

according to P K Twumasi in his book Criminal Law in Ghana (1996) Page 124

states that the doubt, "must be a reasonable probability and not a fanciful possibility.”

It was held in Miller v. Minister of Pensions (1947) 2 A.E.R. 372 at 744 that "proof

beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond a shadow of doubt. The law

would fail to protect the community if it admitted fanciful possibilities to deflect the

course of justice. If the evidence is strong against a man as to leave a remote possibility

in his favour which can be dismissed with a sentence," of course it is possible" but not

the least probable, the case is proved beyond reasonable doubt but nothing short of that

will suffice."

Prosecution in proving its case called two witnesses and tendered three exhibits into

evidence.

PW1 was Ayisi Samuel he told the Court he lives in Begoro and work as a