Victor Yiborku V The Republic (1968)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MADARIKAN, J.S.C.

In charge No. 530/67 the appellant stood trial in the Chief Magistrate’s Court Lagos on charges of various offences of fraudulent false accounting and stealing, and on the 23rd February, 1967 he was discharged and acquitted on all counts. Thereafter the State filed a motion (No. M/152/67) in the Lagos High Court on the 4th September 1967; seeking extension of time within which to appeal against the judgment of the learned Chief Magistrate.The facts relied upon were:-

(1) On the 25th February, 1967, Mr. A. Akinsanya, a solicitor, applied for a copy of the record of proceedings and judgment in charge No. 530/67 and it was supplied to him on the 13th May, 1967.

(2) After perusing the record, he decided to apply for a copy of exhibit ‘F’ ten-dared In the criminal case and on the 18th May, 1967, he applied for it and it was supplied to him on the 2nd June, 1967.

(3) He addressed a petition to the Director of Public Prosecutions on the 5th June, 1967 and it was then that the matter was first brought to the notice of the Director of Public Prosecutions at whose instance the motion referred to earlier was filed on the 4th September, 1967, seeking extension of time within which to appeal.

After hearing arguments on the motion, Caxton-Martins J. decided as follows on the 6th November, 1967:-

There is avoidable delay in bringing this application for enlargement of time. Most reluctantly I will grant the application and allow 7 days to the appellant to comply with the requirement of the Law.”

The appellant has appealed against that decision and his grounds of appeal were:-

“1. That the learned trial judge erred in law when having found the respondent guilty of culpable delay granted the respondent extension of time within which to appeal.

2. That the learned trial judge erred in law when the learned trial judge in granting the application disregarded all the established principles of law applicable to such application.

3. That the learned trial judge erred in law when due consideration to the liberty of the applicant (sic) the learned trial judge granted the respondent ex-tension of time to appeal more than eight whole months after the applicant has been acquitted”

These grounds of appeal were argued together by Mr. Sasegbon who after reviewing the facts submitted that the principles on which an application for extension of time within which to appeal could be granted were that the applicant must:-

(1) advance strong reasons to justify the court in extending the time, and

(2) show that his appeal is likely to succeed.