Ahmadu Lado V. The State (1999)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

B. WALI, J.S.C.

Ahmadu Lado was arraigned before Usman Mohammed, J then of the Kaduna State High Court Charged with the following offence:-

“That you Ahmadu Lado, on or about the 27th day of December, 1985 at Tugen Village, Malumfashi Local Government Area Kaduna State, did commit culpable Homicide punishable with death in that you caused the death of Auta Mohammed by hitting him on the head with a hoe with the knowledge that his death would be the probable consequence of your act and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 221(b) of the Penal Code.”

The charge was read and explained to him and he pleaded not guilty. The case proceeded to trial with both sides calling witnesses and testifying. I shall, in the course of this judgment refer to such evidence where necessary.

At the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Judge delivered a considered judgment in which he found the accused guilty as charged and sentenced him to death.

The accused person appealed against his conviction to the Court of Appeal, Kaduna and in a unanimous judgment of that court, his appeal was dismissed.

The accused person has now further appealed to this court.

I think it is pertinent to give a resume of the prosecution’s case at this stage.

On the fateful day, Auta Muhammed in company of his 13 year old sister drove their herds of cattle for grazing. It was then that the accused came and hit Auta Mohammed with a hoe once on the head below his ear on the right side. Auta Mohammed fell down with blood gushing from the wound.

Auta Mohammed’s sister, Karimatu Alhaji Mohammed after seeing what had happened to her brother, drove the cattle back home and reported the incident to her father Alhaji Mohammed Ahmed who immediately visited the scene of the incident and met his son bleeding and unconscious. He took Auta to Dayi Police Station and lodged a complaint. Auta was taken to Malumfashi general hospital where he later died. The accused was then arrested by the police.

Henceforth the accused person will be referred to as the appellant in this judgment.

In compliance with Rules of this court, appellant’s brief was filed and was later amended with leave. The respondent neither filed respondent’s brief not appeared on the date the appeal came on for hearing, despite the fact that he was served with the appellant’s brief as well as the hearing notice.

Learned counsel for the appellant Tunde Fagbohunlu Esq., adopted his brief and made oral expatiation on some points. In the said brief, he formulated the following five issues:-

“3.1. Whether the learned trial Judge wrongly appraised the evidence on the record and thereby occasioned a miscarriage of justice;