Abubakar P. Dajo V. The State (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

M. B DONGBAN-MENSEM, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The Appellant was charged with 3 others for the offence of criminal conspiracy contrary to Section 96 of the Penal Code Law and Punishable under Section 97(1) of the same law, and he was charged alone for the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death under Section 221(b) of the Penal Code Law.

Pleas of the accused persons were taken and upon a no case submission made for 2nd, 3rd and 4th persons, the trial Court discharged them. The Appellant was left to stand trial for the charge of culpable homicide of one Dahi Doma. The Appellant is alleged to have shot the late Dahi Doma with a poisonous bow and arrow with the knowledge that death will be the probable consequences of such an act. The offence is contrary to Section 221 of the Penal Code.

At the end of the trial before the Adamawa State High Court sitting in Yola, (herein refer as the trial Court), the Appellant was on 26th June, 2008 convicted of the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death contrary to Section 221(b) of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to death by hanging.

Dissatisfied with his conviction and sentence, he had a Notice of Appeal filed against the decision on the 28/09/2008.

The Notice of Appeal is at page 96 – 98 of the records for this appeal and contains 5 grounds of appeal.

From the 5 grounds of appeal, the learned Counsel to the Appellant distilled 3, issues for determination by this Court and these are:-

1. Whether the learned trial Judge was not in error where he held that the prosecutor had proved all the ingredients necessary for establishing the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death.
2. Whether the learned trial judge was right when he rejected the defence of self defence and of provocation put forward by the Appellant.
3. Whether on the whole, the prosecution could be held to have proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt,

The Respondent adopted the three issues distilled by Appellant’s.

ISSUE 1

The Appellant’s learned Counsel submits that in law before the Prosecution would succeed in establishing a murder case, he must establish the existence of these 3 basic ingredients,

a. That a human being died.

b. That the act of the accused caused the death of the deceased.

c. That the accused had the intention to cause the death of the deceased.

(Refer:- the case of Shande v. State (2004) ALL FWLR (Pt. 228) 1955).