Eneji v. State (2024)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

ADAMU JAURO, J.S.C. (Delivering the Lead Judgment)

This appeal is against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Calabar Division which affirmed the Appellant’s conviction and sentence for the offences of conspiracy and causing harm, by the High Court of Cross River State.

BRIEF STATEMENT OF FACTS
The Appellant as the 3rd accused person was arraigned alongside two other persons, Adie Christopher Ebodo and Olom Adie, on a two-count charge which reads as follows:

“STATEMENT OF OFFENCE
CONSPIRACY contrary to Section 520(6) of the Criminal Code Law Cap C16 Vol. 3 Laws of Cross River State of Nigeria 2004.

PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE
ADIE CHRISTOPHER EBODO, OLOM ADIE and AJOR ENEJI on the 28th day of October, 2007 at St. Mark’s Primary School Gakem, Bekwarra in the Ogoja Judicial Division did conspire amongst yourselves to effect an unlawful purpose to wit: Cause grievous harm to Hon. Agabi Edward Efenji.

STATEMENT OF OFFENCE COUNT II
GRIEVOUS HARM contrary to Section 355 of the Criminal Code Law Cap C16 Vol. 3 laws of Cross River State of Nigeria 2004.

PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE
ADIE CHRISTOPHER EBODO, OLOMADIE and AJOR ENEJI on the 28th day of October, 2007 at St. Mark’s Primary School Gakem, Bekwarra in the Ogoja Judicial Division did cause grievous harm to Hon Agabi Edward Efenji.”
​
At the trial, the Respondent as Prosecution called four witnesses. PW1 was Hon. Agabi Edward Efenji (the victim of the offence); PW2 was Mary Agbo Efeneji, PW1’s wife; PW3 was one Opah Irinam, who rescued PW1 from his assailants. The trial Court relied heavily on the evidence of PW3 as he was regarded a neutral eyewitness who had no interest to serve and PW4 was the IPO.

On their part, the accused persons each testified in their defence and called two other witnesses, DW5, Chief Opah Ushie and DW6, Hon. Dominic Okana. DW3, another defence witness could not present himself for cross-examination due to ill health, hence his evidence was expunged from the record. The Appellant herein testified as DW2. A number of documents were tendered and admitted in evidence as exhibits, most notably Exhibit 1 (Police medical report) tendered by PW4.
​
It was the case of the Respondent that the paramount ruler of Bekwarra Local Government Area in Cross River State, His Royal Highness Stephen Onoh summoned a meeting of his community to discuss the management of Eyatem Primary School. PW1 was one of the attendees at the meeting and midway through the meeting, he left the hall to go to the bathroom and just as he was about to step out, the 1st accused person signalled to the Appellant and 2nd accused person.

That PW1’s path was blocked by the Appellant and 2nd accused person, before they created a narrow space for him to pass through and eventually allowed him to exit the hall. It was stated that upon leaving the hall, PW1 was attacked by the Appellant and the 2nd accused person with fist blows, sticks, slippers and sandals, and sustained injuries all over his body.

The Appellant and the 2nd accused person threatened that if PW1 did not leave the school for the 1st accused person to manage, they would kill him. PW1 was rescued by PW3 who heard of the noise from the beating from his commercial vehicle while he was waiting for passengers.
​
The Appellant testified that on the day of the incident, he went to use the toilet at St. Mark Primary School, Gakem. He said he was returning and saw PW1 and the 2nd accused person exchanging words, that he then heard the sound of a slap on the face of the 2nd accused person.

The Appellant further stated that he heard the 2nd accused person questioning PW1 as to why he slapped him, and that the 2nd accused person slapped PW1 back. He stated that he asked the 2nd accused person to let go of PW1 and that he eventually separated the fight. The Appellant denied seeing the 1st accused person at the scene of the commotion. The 2nd accused person on his part stated that PW1 blew catarrh/mucus from his nose and onto his body. He stated that when he challenged PW1, he slapped him.

With regard to the 1st accused person, PW1 testified that he signalled to the 2nd and 3rd accused persons to beat him and that he also joined them in the beating. PW2 on her part only stated that the 1st accused person signalled to the 2nd and 3rd accused persons to beat him, but did not mention that he joined in the beating. DW5 and DW6 testified that the 1st accused person was inside the hall throughout.

At the conclusion of hearing and after the addresses of counsel, the learned trial Judge acquitted the 1st accused person of both counts and accordingly discharged him. The Court stated that upon the state of evidence led, it entertained doubts as to whether the 1st accused person took part in the beating of PW1 or that he made any signal to direct the Appellant and 2nd accused to beat PW1.

The Court however found that the Appellant herein and the 2nd accused person had beaten up PW1. The learned trial Judge found the catarrh story told by the 2nd accused person incredible and disbelieved same. It was also found that the injuries sustained by PW1 as shown in Exhibit I did not qualify as grievous harm. The Appellant and the 2nd accused person were therefore convicted for the offence of conspiracy and the lesser offence of causing harm to PW1. They were sentenced to one year imprisonment for each of the counts, with the sentences to run concurrently.
​
The Appellant’s appeal to the Court below was dismissed for lacking in merit and he has, pursuant to an order of this Court granting him extension of time to seek leave to appeal and leave to appeal, instituted the instant appeal via a Notice of Appeal predicated on five grounds of appeal.