Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Ubani V. State (2003) CLR 12(e) (SC)

Judgement delivered on December 12th 2003

Brief

  • Medical evidence
  • Circumstantial evidence
  • Onus of proof in criminal trials
  • Inconsistency rule
  • Murder charge
  • Concurrent finding of fact
  • Contradiction in evidence of prosecution witness

Facts

By an information dated 13th day of September, 1991 the three Appellants on record were arraigned with three others before Isiala Ngwa High Court jointly charged on two counts of offences, to wit, conspiracy and kidnapping contrary to Sections 516(a) and 364(b) respectively of the Criminal Code Cap. 30 Vol. 11 Laws of Eastern Nigeria 1963 applicable in Abia State. The particulars of the offences alleged that the three Appellants and the three others and others at large on the 26th of March, 1991 at Amuzu Umurasi in Isiala Ngwa Judicial Division conspired to commit a felony, to wit, kidnapping and on the aforesaid date at Umuikeogale Oruokwu imprisoned Allison Abajua in such a manner as to prevent Felicia Abajua his wife from discovering the place where he was imprisoned.

Each accused person pleaded not guilty to the charge and thereafter the prosecution called five witnesses at the conclusion of which the teamed Trial 'Judge, Isuama J, pursuant to Section 163 of the Criminal Procedure Law ordered that the charge be amended to read murder contrary to Section 319 of the said Criminal Code.

The star witnesses for the prosecution who gave eye witness accounts of the events that led to the charge against the Appellants were Ugboaku Abajua (P.W.1) and Felicia Abajua (P.W.2) who were the daughter and wife respectively of Allison Abajua hereinafter referred to as the deceased. Their evidence was to the effect that on 26th March, 1991 at about 6 a.m., one Hilary Chukwuemeka, a legal practitioner came to the house of the deceased, met him where he was weaving a mat and threatened that if the deceased did not vacate his premises, he would see what would happen to him. Apparently, the deceased did not heed the warning, Subsequently, at about 10a.m the same day, the six accused persons standing trial including the three Appellants in company with others at large who are from Amuzu village and were relations of Hillary Chukwuemeka the legal practitioner and had come to harvest palm fruit near the house of the deceased, pounced on the deceased and asked him if he did not hear what their lawyer told him. They, armed with guns, matchets and clubs started beating the deceased until he fell down. He was dragged to the house of one of the accused persons at Amuzu. It is the case for the prosecution that the deceased died in consequence of the assault on him by the accused persons with whom he had a land dispute. A report was lodged at the police at Umuoba and on investigation, some arrests were made. On 15/11/91, Inspector Silas Onuoha (P.W. 4) took Dr. Chima Nwafor (P.W.3) to Umuorasi in the house of one of the accused persons where from a disused latrine pit a human forearm and a human leg were exhumed. The P.W.3 in his evidence" stated that from the specimen provided, the sex of the victim could not be determined but that the extent of the decomposition did suggest that the body of the victim must have been there for about six months. In their defence, the accused persons denied any involvement in the murder of the deceased. They elected not to go into the witness box after the relevant provision of the Criminal Procedure Law was explained to them.

The Learned Trial Judge after a careful review of the evidence convicted the six accused persons for the offence of murder and accordingly sentenced each to death. Each of the three Appellants on record lodged an appeal to the Court of Appeal Port Harcourt Division and in its judgment on 12th July, 2001 it dismissed the appeal of the 1st Appellant and in another judgment delivered on 30th May 2002 similarly dismissed the appeal of each of the 2nd and 3rd Appellants. These are further appeals by each of the three Appellants against their convictions and sentences for the offences of murder.

Issues

  • 1
    Was the charge of murder proved whether by direct or circumstantial...
  • Read More