Businessman on GH¢20,000 bail for destroying properties
The Sunyani District Magistrate Court ‘B’ presided by Mr. Joseph Mensah has granted a GH¢20,000 bail with two sureties to a businessman in Sunyani for causing extensive damage to properties worth thousands of Ghana Cedis.
Nana Adjei Ntow, an Independent Candidate for the Sunyani East parliamentary seat in the 2004 general election, pleaded not guilty and would reappear before the court on January 20 this year.
Prosecuting, Chief Inspector Grace Coffie told the court that the complainants are four traders occupying the ground floor of “George Arthur Plaza”, a one storey building in the central business area of Sunyani.
She said the complainants had the names of their enterprises as BEBEL Ventures, SASCO Computers Company Limited, FLO-LINDER Textiles Company Limited and PEEMAN Company Limited.
Chief Inspector Coffie told the court that the accused person who is not known to the complainants as their landlord for sometime now had been claiming ownership of the storey building and had been seeking to eject them. The issue had been pending before a Sunyani High Court
On January 7 this year, at about 7pm, the complainants closed their shops and left for their respective homes.
The Prosecutor continued that at about 11pm on that day, the accused engaged about 10 young men, led them to the Plaza and using heavy duty hammers broke the concrete roof of the complainants’ stores.
Chief Inspector Coffie said the roof and items damaged at the BEBEL Ventures is estimated at the cost of GH¢447.5 and GH¢1,131.50 respectively whilst that of the SASCO is valued at GH¢536.5 and GH¢10,955 in that order.
The damaged roof and items of PEEMAN Company Limited is GH¢447.5 and GH¢8,210, she said.
The accused was arrested and during investigations, he claimed responsibility and told the police that he was carrying out renovation on the property.
The accused’s plea for bail to enable him to engage the services of a counsel was granted and Mr. Mensah therefore reminded him that the court would proceed with the case if he failed to present a counsel on the next adjournment date.
Source: GNA