Bello v. State (2022)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

IBRAHIM MUHAMMAD MUSA SAULAWA, J.S.C. (Delivering the Lead Judgment)

The present appeal has emanated from the judgment of the Court of Appeal Kaduna Judicial Division, delivered on March 26th, 2015 in appeal No. CA/K/443/2013.

By the said judgment, the Court below coram U.M. Abba Aji, A, Aboki, JJCA (as they were) & HAO Abiru, JCA, dismissed the Appellant’s appeal against his conviction and sentence of 21 years imprisonment for conspiracy and armed robbery, contrary to Sections 97 and 300 of the Penal Code laws of Jigawa State, 1998.

BACKGROUND FACTS
On April 28th, 2011, the Appellant and one other person were arraigned before the trial Court holden at Birnin Kudu upon a two count charge of conspiracy, contrary to Sections 97 and 298 of the Penal Code, Laws of Jigawa State, 1998.

The Appellant pleaded not guilty to both counts of the charge. At the conclusion of the trial, the Appellant was convicted for the offences of conspiracy and armed robbery as charged.

However, the trial Court in exercising its discretion under Section 218 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, decided to convict the Appellant under Section 300 of the Penal Code, and thereby sentenced him to a term of 21 years imprisonment for both counts.

Dissatisfied with the conviction and sentence thereof, the Appellant appealed to the Court below. On the said 28/03/2013, the Court below delivered the vexed judgment, thereby dismissing the appeal and affirming the conviction and sentence of the Appellant by the trial Court.

The original Notice of Appeal to this Court was filed in the Court below on 23/4/2015 (pages 153-156 of the Record of Appeal). By the said Notice of Appeal, the Appellant urged upon this Court for an order setting aside the conviction and sentence passed thereupon.

On March 17th, when the appeal ultimately came up for hearing, the learned counsels were duly accorded the opportunity of addressing this Court and adopting the argument contained in their respective briefs, thereby warranting the Court to reserve judgment to today.

Most particularly, the Appellant’s brief of argument, settled by Tonye Krukrubo Esq. on 27/11/2018, spans a total of 23 pages. At pages 4-5 of the brief, two issues have been nominated for determination, viz:

1. Whether the trial Court has jurisdiction to

entertain the charges against the Appellant when leave was not obtained to prefer the said charges. (Distilled from Ground One)

2. Whether the Court of Appeal ought to have interfered with the way and manner the trial Court evaluated the evidence presented by the parties. (Distilled from Ground Two)

Issue No. 1 is canvassed at pages 5-10 of the brief, to the effect that the charge leading to the conviction of the Appellant was not initiated by due process of the law. The reason being that Section 185 (b) of the Criminal Procedure Code of Jigawa State was not complied with, as no leave was obtained prior to its being filed.

Further submitted, that as the charge was filed before leave was obtained, the charge is grossly incompetent. See JAMES EGIGIA VS. THE STATE (2013) LPELR-20754 (CA); HAMZAT VS. SANNI (2015) 5 NWLR (pt. 1453) 486.

However, the Court is urged not to make an order for retrial as the evidence presented did not disclose a substantial case against the Appellant, and the fact that the Appellant has spent 8 years in detention.
The Court is urged to so hold.