Segun Ajibade Vs The State (2012)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAHI MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, J.S.C

The appellant herein and three (3) other persons were arrested and charged on two counts of conspiracy to commit felony to wit armed robbery and the offence of armed robbery contrary to section 5 (b) and 1 (2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms (special provisions) Act Cap.398 Laws of Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended by the Tribunal (certain consequential Amendments etc) Decree 1999.

On the 23rd of October, 2000 the appellant and three others, whilst armed, with offensive weapons to wit-an iron rod, stole a Lister generating set at ELF FILLING STATION, Abeokuta Ogun State. In the process, the appellant and others killed one of the guards by hitting him on the head with iron rod, while the other was seriously injured.

At the trial the prosecution called eleven (11) witnesses and tendered 13 Exhibits while the appellant rested his case on that of the prosecution. On 25 /5/2002 Adebayo’, the prosecution counsel, announced that the prosecution has closed its case.

Then ‘Adeniyi’, the defence counsel asked for an adjournment to enable him adequately prepare for the defence, court then adjourned for defence.

On 1/8/2002 the following happened in court;-

“B. A. Adebayo (PSC) appears for the state says he has seen the letter written to the court by the learned Counsel for the accused persons to explain his absence from court and to request for the adjournment of the case. Says further that he is not opposing the application for adjournment”.

See also  Grace Boms V. The State (1971) LLJR-SC

Court-Case is adjourned till 8/10/2002 for defence to open.

On the 16 /10/2002, the record of proceedings also revealed what happened that day:-

“Accused persons are present.

B. A. Adebayo (PSC) appears for the state.

C. O- Adeniyi appears for the accused persons.

Adeniyi says: The prosecution has closed its case. He proceeds to address the court.

The record also shows that even though the accused persons counsel was in the court he did not challenge the statement made by the prosecution’s counsel or made any attempt to call any witness and neither did he address the court even-though he was resting his case on that of the prosecution.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *