Mufutau Bakare V. The State (1987)
LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report
OPUTA, J.S.C.
This appeal was set down for hearing on the 11th day of December, 1986. After going through the record of proceedings, the Briefs filed out both side (which were too brief to be of any use) and hearing learned counsel for the Appellant, I did not consider it necessary to call upon learned counsel for the Respondent.
I there and then dismissed the appeal, affirmed the judgment of the Court below, and confirmed the conviction and sentence of the Court of first instance. I indicated that I will give reasons for my judgment today, the 6th day of March, 1987. Hereunder are those reasons.
The Appellant, Mufutau Bakare, was charged with the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death under Section 221(b) of the Penal Code. He was arraigned before the Kwara State High Court holden at Ilorin and presided over by Gbadeyan, J. The learned trial Judge heard the evidence of 9 prosecution witnesses. The Appellant made an extra judicial Statement to the Police in Yoruba tendered as Ex. 3. The English translation was tendered as Ex.4. In addition to Ex.3 and Ex.4, the Appellant gave oral evidence on oath in his own defence. After reviewing the evidence on both sides Gbadeyan, J. found the Appellant guilty and sentenced him to death.
The Appellant aggrieved by the above conviction and sentence appealed to the Court of Appeal Kaduna Division Coram Wali, Maidama and Babalakin, J.J.C.A. That Court by a unanimous verdict dismissed his appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence of the trial Court. Still aggrieved the Appellant has now appealed to the Supreme Court of Nigeria on 9 grounds of various errors and misdirection in fact as well as in law.
The first ground of appeal complained that:
“1. The decision of the Court of Appeal is unreasonable having regard to the evidence before the trial Court”.
This ground deals with, the facts of the case, the evidence led on both sides. the evaluation of that evidence, the ascription of probative value to such evidence, the credibility of witnesses who testified, the consideration of all credible evidence and the logical conclusion both of fact and of law to be drawn from the totality of the evidence led. All these are matters squarely within the exclusive competence of the trial Judge who saw, heard and believed. Understandably, therefore, an appellate Court is naturally very reluctant to reverse on ground 1 above the findings of trial Judge who had the peculiar advantage of seeing the witnesses, of watching their demeanour and of hearing them give evidence.
Therefore, again, when the questions involved are purely those of fact an appellate court will not interefer unless the decision of the trial Judge is shown to be perverse and not the result of a proper exercise of judicial discretion (to believe or disbelieve witnesses) or that there is no evidence at all to support a particular crucial finding or that the trial court made wrong deductions or drew wrong inferences from admitted or established facts.
There is such a myraid of authorities to support the above propositions that it is unnecessary to repeat them here. What is necessary is to look critically at the evidence before the trial Court to see whether the learned trial Judge erred in his handling of the facts and whether it is true that his decision “is unreasonahle having regard to the evidence before him.”
The star witness for the prosecution was Jonathan David called as P.W.2.He was an eye-witness. He was present and saw all that happened. He heard the Appellant threaten to “deal ruthlessly” with the deceased stressing that his action will lead the deceased “to the hospital”.
He made good his threat. His action led the deceased to the hospital alright. The deceased was taken to the hospital in an unconscious state on 18/11/81 and he died on 19/11/81. What did the Appellant do to the deceased in the execution of his threat Without any provocation whatsoever and following a mere argument over the tearing of the deceased person’s motor-cycle seat by the Appellant’s younger brother, the Appellant rushed into his room, fetched his dagger, made for the deceased and plunged the dagger into the head of the deceased.
The dagger had to be pulled out by the P.W.2. The deceased collapsed and slumped down soaked in his own blood. The Appellant tried to run away but the P.W.2 gave chase and caught him. The P.W.2 and others took the deceased, and the Appellant to the hospital. At the hospital the doctor insisted, and rightly too, that the Appellant be handed over to the Police. This the P.W.2 did. There the Appellant was arrested. The murder weapon (Appellant’s dagger) was recovered under a grinding stone (belonging to the Appellant) at the entrance of the Appellant’s own room. The dagger was tendered as Ex.1.
The story of the P.W.2 was corroborated by the evidence of the other witnesses. Shaibu Aremu called as P.W.3 was in his bathroom when he heard the P.W.2 shouting “Help, Please help me.” He ran out and saw the P.W.2 holding the Appellant. He also saw blood gushing out from the head of the deceased. He helped the P.W.2 to convey the deceased to the hospital and he was present when the Police recovered the Appellant’s dagger EX.1 from underneath the Appellant’s grinding stone. The evidence of Dr. James Omoniyi Fagbayi called as P.W.6 showed the ferocity with which the Appellant stabbed the deceased who died of truama, shock and bleeding. The medical evidence was that the cut on the head was 1/2 to 3/4 inch deep and about 1 1/2 to 2 inches long. The medical opinion was that this cut could easily lead to death and that Ex.1 could produce the injuries on the deceased. This was the summary of the prosecution’s case against the Appellant. It is this case that the trial Court will have to compare and contrast with the defence of the Appellant.
Leave a Reply