The High Court in Amasaman has denied an application for bail filed by convicted Evangelist Patricia Asiedua, popularly known as Nana Agradaa, pending an appeal.
The founder of Heaven Way Champion International Ministry had prayed the Court to admit her to bail as she believed the 15 years custodial sentence was in error.
On Tuesday, July 15, lawyers of Nana Agradaa led by Richard Asare Baffour argued that her conviction was a prima facie wrong and wants the court to grant her a temporary freedom.
The Court presided over by Justice Dr. Richmond Osei Hwere denied the request bail.
But, ordered the Registrar of the Circuit Court for a timely production of the record of the proceedings within 14 days.
This order was to ensure expeditious hearing of the appeal which has since been lodged since July 6, 2025.
Nana Agradaa, was convicted and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment with hard labor on July 3, 2025, for defrauding some members of the public.
Since her incarceration, her lawyers, led by Richard Asare Baffour, have disagreed with both the conviction and the sentence and have filed a petition for appeal.
With no date set for the appeal, the lawyers moved swiftly to file an application for bail pending appeal on July 9, 2025.
In her statement of case in support of the motion for bail, through her legal representatives argued that “the applicant is confident that the appeal has a strong chance of success due to the flaws that characterized the trial and the bias exhibited by the trial judge.”
The lawyers further stated that she would make herself available in court as required, undertake not to interfere with or contravene the terms of the bail bond in any way, and that the sureties would provide adequate security as required by the court in support of the bail application.
The Circuit Court, presided over by Her Honor Evelyn Asamoah, sentenced her to 25 penalty units or in default 30 days for the offense of charlatanic advertisement on (count 1) and 15 years imprisonment with hard labor each on two counts of defrauding by false pretenses (counts 2 &3). However, the sentences are to run concurrently.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied with the conviction and sentence, Nana Agradaa filed a petition of appeal.
The convict takes issue with the way the trial was conducted, the basis for the decisions, and the sentence handed down.
“The applicant contends that the trial was unfairly conducted, as the burden of proof was improperly shifted to her to prove her innocence, rather than requiring the prosecution to prove her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,” she contended.
Statement of Case
It was her case that, instead of requiring the prosecution to prove the allegations about the lights and camera being turned off, the trial judge shifted the burden to the applicant to prove that the lights and camera were indeed on.
She contended that the trial judge unfairly relied on a statement made by the Master of Ceremonies (MC) in the video presented by the applicant to discredit the applicant’s testimony.
Nana Agradaa said this was particularly problematic since the specific allegation made by the complainants was that the applicant personally instructed them to turn off the lights, which the applicant denied.
“The judge’s reliance on the MC’s statement to discredit the applicant’s denial is unjustified.
“The trial judge conducted a selective analysis of the evidence. While the judge meticulously noted the specific time tag of the lighting issue (blinking) in the video and compared the length of the applicant’s video to the length of the service, the judge intentionally avoided analyzing the length of the lighting issue and comparing the length of the lighting issue to the length of the alleged activities,” she stated.
“The applicant contends that the trial judge failed to consider the mitigating factors presented during sentencing, despite referencing Ghana’s Sentencing Guidelines. The judgment does not reflect any consideration of the applicant’s plea in mitigation.
“I have been advised by counsel, and verily believe it to be true, that the sentencing guidelines provide for a range of punishments across five scales.”
Nana Agradaa further stated that she was confident that the appeal had a strong chance of success due to the flaws that characterized the trial and the bias exhibited by the trial judge.
She undertook to make herself available in court as required, not to interfere with or contravene the terms of the bail bond in any way, and that the sureties would provide adequate security as required by the court in support of the bail application.
