Quantcast
Channel: Concord Times Communication
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 7881

Judge discharges two matters for want of evidence

$
0
0

March 7, 2016 By Hassan Gbassay Koroma

Justice Alusine Sesay, presiding at the Freetown High Court, last Friday discharged one Sulaiman Kargbo and Alpha Bangura, who were standing trial for robbery with aggravation and receiving stolen goods, contrary to section 33(1) of the Larceny Act of 1916.

The judge also discharged one Claudius Jones, who was also before him on seven counts of conspiracy, forgery, uttering, obtaining goods on forged document and demanding goods on forged document.

The prosecution had alleged that on 23 April, 2014 Kargbo and Bangura, while being armed with a dagger, robbed a certain Yusuf Jalloh a Nokia mobile phone valued Le1.7 million, a Samsung Galaxy phone valued Le1.2 million, a  wrist watch that cost Le1.3 million and a Chelsea replica jersey worth Le350,000, all to the total value of Le4,450,000.

In the other matter involving Jones, the prosecution had alleged that between 1 and 13 December, 2013 in Freetown, he conspired with some unknown persons to defraud Zara Sahid Antar the sum of Le37,765,000 by making false representation that he was an employee of the National Social Security and Insurance Trust (NASSIT).

It was also alleged that the accused presented a fake Rokel Commercial Bank cheque No. 1270022 dated 13 December, 2013 for the sum of Le7,765,000 to  purchase a 4.5KVA  generator, 15 drums spectrum paint, 25 gallons sky shine oil paint, 10 rolls 3029 twin cable and 10 door locks, knowing same to be false.

Sonia Bobanie-Browne from the Legal Aid Board made an application for the accused persons to be discharged because the prosecution had failed to produce witnesses to testify on the two matters.

“My Lord, discharge is not a bar and the prosecution can at anytime indict the accused persons if they have any case against them, but they cannot be in custody for all these years while the prosecution is not presenting witness(es) to testify on the matter.  It is on this grounds that we are asking for a discharge,” she submitted.

In his ruling, Justice Sesay noted that the accused persons had been in custody for over two years and that the prosecution had failed to produce and witness to expedite the trial.

He ordered for the accused persons to be discharged and admonished them not to be involved in any criminal activity.


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 7881

Trending Articles