Why Court reduced Agradaa’s sentence to 12 months

• Posted on February 6, 2026February 6, 2026
• by Nana Kwesi Coomson
• Comment

The self–styled traditionalist turned evangelist, Patricia Asiedu Asiamah, popularly known as Nana Agradaa has had her 15 year-jail term reduced to 12 months by the High Court in Amasaman.

The court, presided over by Justice Solomon Oppong-Twumasi, reduced the sentence after it upheld an appeal by Agradaa that the sentence imposed on her by the Accra Circuit Court was harsh and excessive.

“Considering all the circumstances of the case together, I came to the irresistible conclusion that the sentence of 15 years imprisonment imposed on the Appellant was indeed unusually harsh and excessive,” Justice Oppong-Twumasi held.

The reduced sentence of 12 months, per the court’s order, will take effect from July 3, 2025 when Agradaa was convicted by the Circuit Court.

Apart from reducing the sentence, the High Court further imposed a fine of GH¢2,400 on the convict, in default; she would serve an additional three months’ imprisonment.

Sentence

In July 2025, Agradaa was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment each on two counts of defrauding by false pretence, after the Circuit Court found her guilty and ordered that she served the two sentences concurrently.

The conviction and sentence stemmed from a televised broadcast in 2022 in which Agradaa told the public she was willing to share GH¢300,000 to the needy during a church service, but ended up taking various sums of money from people without giving out any money.

Excessive sentence

Delivering the judgment Thursday [Feb 5, 2026], Justice Oppong-Twumasi held that the sentence was excessive and harsh.

According to the High Court, the Circuit Court failed to fairly consider the circumstances of the case but was rather focused on the personality involved (Agradaa) before imposing the sentence.

“The trial judge did not fairly consider the enormity of the crime involved, but she became fixated only on the person involved in imposing the sentence on the Appellant,” the court held.

Giving details, the High Court said per the records of the trial, there were two complainants, who each lost GH¢500, totalling GH¢1,000, in the fraud perpetuated by Agradaa.

“The court is not by any stretch of imagination to be understood to be saying that because there were only two victims of the Appellant’s conduct or because the amount involved was only GH¢1,000, the Appellant did not commit any crime nor is it also to be understood to be saying that because of the rather small amount of money, the victims did not suffer any losses at all,” the court added.

Unfair treatment

Again, the court added that the trial Circuit Court acted unfairly towards the Appellant (Agradaa) as it failed to consider some inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case.

“There were indeed some inconsistencies in the evidence of both sides, but strangely, in her judgment, the Honourable trial judge only commented on the inconsistencies in the evidence of the Appellant but did not even in passing, comment on the inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case,” the court added.