Abubakar Dankidi V. The State (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

TUNDE O. AWOTOYE, J.C.A. (Delivering The Leading Judgment)

This is the Judgment in respect of the appeal filed by ABUBAKAR DANKIDI who was convicted along with two other accused of the offence of attempt to commit the offence of armed robbery contrary to section 2 (2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act on 30/3/2011.

The charge against the accused persons (including the appellant) at the court below read as follows:

“CHARGES

1. That you Yusuf Abubakar, Abubakar Labbo and Abubakar Dankidi on or about the 20th day of May, 2008, at about 16:30hrs in the Bush of Bimasa in Tureta Local Government Area of Sokoto State within Sokoto Judicial Division did agreed to do an illegal act to wit; armed yourselves with a cutlass and a knife and attacked and robbed one Ahmadu Na’ardo Buba and that same act done in pursuance of the agreement and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 6(b) of the Robbery and firearms (Special Provision) Act R II L.F.N 2004.
2. That Yusuf Abubakar, Abubakar Labbo and Abubakar Dankidi on or about the 20th day of May, 2008, at about 16:30hrs in the Bush of Bimasa in Tureta Local Government Area of Sokoto State within Sokoto Judicial Division did commit the offence of Armed Robbery is that while armed with a cutlass and a knife attacked one Ahmadu Na’ardo Buba beat him and rubbed him the sum of N17,200 (seventeen thousand two hundred Naira) you thereby committed an offence punishable under section 1(2) of the Robbery and firearms (Special Provision) Act Cap R II L.F.N 2004.

The prosecution, after the court had taken the pleas of the accused persons called witnesses. The accused person also called evidence in defence of themselves.

The learned trial Judge after hearing the parties gave judgment inter alia, convicting the accused persons, thus:

“It is to be noted that on addition to the confessions of the three accused persons in this case admitted in evidence as exhibit B and B1, C and C1 and D and D1. the confessional statement of the first accused person Yusuf Abubakar as exhibit B and B1, the confessional statement of the second accused person Abubakar Labbo as exhibit D and D1 and the confessional statement of the 3rd accused person as exhibit C and C1, there exists some independent evidence corroborating the individual confessions of the accused person in this case.

The evidence of PW3 the victim of the robbery incidence the evidence of PW4 an eye witness to the robbery incident and the evidence of PW5 also an eye witness to the incident and exhibits, A, A1, A2 and A3 are all corroborative of the various confessional statements of the accused persons in this case.”

Be that as it may, after a very careful perusal of the evidence adduced by the prosecution before me I am quite satisfied that the prosecution has failed to establish a case under 1 (2) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act Cap R11 L.F.N 2004, but I have no doubt in my mind that a case of attempt to commit armed robbery contrary to section 2(2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms Act was proved against the 1st, 2nd and 3rd accused persons in this case and I found them guilty and convict them accordingly. The accused persons are equally found guilty for the offence of conspiracy under section 6 (b) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act Cap R11 L.F.N 2004 and I convict them accordingly.”

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the Lower Court, the appellant on 29/6/2011 filed a Notice of Appeal containing a single ground of appeal. With leave of court on 5/3/2013 5 additional grounds of appeal were filed by the appellant.

The grounds of appeal (excluding the particulars) read as follows;

“GROUND 1

The Learned Trial Judge erred in law when he (sic) it failed to discharge and acquit the accused person after holding that the ingredients of the offence of armed robbery against the accused persons were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

GROUND 2