Ukaobasi Ajunwa Vs The State (1988)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OBASEKI, Ag. C.J.N. 

On the 30th day of June, 1988, this appeal was heard by this court and after considering the submissions of counsel for the parties in their briefs of arguments filed in this Court and those made at the oral hearing before us together with the judgment of the Court of Appeal and the proceedings in that court and the High Court; I found no merit in the appeal. I then dismissed the appeal and adjourned the delivery of my reasons for the judgment till today. I now proceed to give them.

The appellant was tried on information for the offence of murder of one Samuel Aminako Agwu contrary to section 319 (1) of the Criminal Code Cap 30 Vol. 2 Laws of Eastern Nigeria 1963 before the High Court of Justice of Imo State holden at Umuahia and convicted by Ononuju, J. He was then sentenced to death.

Being dissatisfied with the conviction and sentence the appellant appealed grounds. As the particulars given are rather prolix, I shall set out hereunder the 7 grounds without the particulars. They read:

“(1) The learned trial Judge erred in convicting the appellant when he held that the defence of self-defence and provocation did not avail the appellant when there was abundant and over-whelming evidence to support those defences.

Particulars

(Omitted)

(2) The learned trial Judge erred in law when he held d.w. 5 to be a hired witness merely on the grounds that this witness made his statement to Police sixteen days after the incidence of the 19th of November, 1984 and also because the witness stated that he saw Caroline and her sister Queen on the date in question.

Particulars

(Omitted)

(3) The learned trial Judge erred in law when citing Obaji v. The State (1965) NMLR. 417, he held that the gun used by the appellant was disproportionate to the provocation caused by the deceased, when there was overwhelming evidence from the defence, that the deceased was armed with a short gun which used the same type of cartridge as the appellant’s gun.

Particulars

(Omitted)

(4) The learned trial Judge erred in law when he held that the contradictions in the evidence of p.w.s. 2, 3, 5 and 7 were not material when it was very clear that the contradictions were not only materials but they exposed these witnesses as most unreliable and biased.