Try asking the following...
BY COURT
On 2/6/2021, the 3rd Accused persons were arraigned before this court
on three counts
BY COURT: On 02-/06/2021. The three accused persons were
arraigned before this court on 3 counts.
JUDICIAL SERVICE OF GHANA JUDICIAL SERVICE OF GHANA JUDICIAL SERVICE OF GHANA JUDICIAL SERVICE OF GHANA
-
The charges were Abetment of crime to wit fraudulent transaction in land. Sections 20 of Act 29/60 and section 277 (2) (b) of Act 1036 of 2020, thus the land Act.
-
Conspiracy to commit crime namely, fraudulent transaction in land section 23(1) of Act 29/60 and section 277 (2) (B) OF Land’s Act 1036 of 2020.
-
Fraudulent transaction in land section 277 (2) ( C) OF (And Act, 1036 of 2020.
Per the facts of the case in 2018, A1-A3 Fraudulently gave out a land to one Angela Ntiful.
A1 pleaded guilty while A2 and A3 pleaded not guilty.
On 7th February, 2023 counsel for A1 -A3 filed motion at the court for the court to strike out the charge and discharged acquit and discharge A1-A3 since the law under which they were charged, was promulgated in 2020 so at the time they allegedly committed the offence the law was not in existence.
Prosecution on 09/06/2023 filed a motion at the court to arrest the ruling of the court to enable prosecutor to withdraw the charge sheet and substitute with a new one
It is trite law that a person cannot be charged on an offence which did not exist at the time the alleged offence was committed. One cannot be charged for a non existence crime.
A1 pealed guilty to non-existence crime. Can the plea of A1 be set aside by this court?
In the case of Awudu vrs the state High Court Tamale. 17th March, 1967 (reported) the court among others held that a plea of guilty in respect of an offence which did not exist in written law at the time of the commission of the act can set aside for non -compliance with fundamental principle of legality
In the light of the above therefore, the plea of guilty which was entered against A1 is hereby set aside since the land Act came into effect in 2020.
In 2015 the accused persons were alleged to have committed an offence is wrong in law.
I have therefore struck out the charges against A1-A3.
Also, prosecution motion to arrest the ruling and to enable him substitute the charge sheet cannot be granted. It will amount to persecuting the accused person.
The complainant can take on civil action against the accused persons., A1-A3 a