Albert Ezeala V. The State (1996)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ONALAJA, J.C.A. 

The Appellant was convicted and sentenced to death on 21st day of February, 1991 by Pats-Acholonu, J., (as he then was) sitting at Etiti High Court of Imo State of Nigeria on a charge that on the 3rd day of January, 1982 at Isiebu Umuduru, appellant murdered his wife Comfort Ezeala contrary to Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Imo State. Being dissatisfied with the said conviction, he appealed to this court.

It transpired at the trial before Justice Pats-Acholonu (as he then was) that due to inadvertance, commission and omission the charge was neither read nor explained to the Appellant and in fact his plea was never taken.

In proving its case the prosecution hereinafter referred to in this judgment as the Respondent called five witnesses. The 5th PW Police Officer in the team that investigated the case tendered the statement of the Appellant to Police during the conduct of investigation of the case by the police. As the statement turned out to be a confessional statement, Appellant was taken before a senior police officer before whom he confirmed the content of the statement and that it was given voluntarily by him. The document was admitted as Exhibit “A” without any objection by the learned counsel for the Appellant. But alas, when the Appellant gave evidence, he resiled the content and that he was maltreated by the police and that it was not voluntary.

The summary of the facts of the case being that the Appellant lived with the deceased his wife in Lagos. Appellant worked with U.A.C. Nigeria Ltd., in Apapa in Lagos. In December, 1981, the appellant and his wife now deceased returned to their home at Mbano for the final funeral rites for his father-in-law. The ceremony lasted for two days in the deceased home. After the ceremony on 30th December, 1981 the appellant left for his own family home while the deceased wife remained behind in her family home and compound. By 2nd January, 1982 the deceased did not return to join her husband (Appellant) in his family home, so he came to look for the deceased. Appellant was intimated by the senior brother of the deceased who testified as 1st PW of the maltreatment meted out to the deceased several times in Lagos one of which resulted in abortion of a pregnancy. To resolve the issue and settle the differences, appellant was advised to go home and bring his relations to settle the matter.

In compliance with the advice appellant went back home and returned to his in-laws accompanied with his own relations. The appellant’s brother raised the tradition and custom that in such a situation the deceased should have sent back a jar of palm wine to her husband and family before any issue could be tabled for discussion. After discussions and deliberations, it was resolved that the deceased should go back and return in the evening for settlement in the deceased’s family home.

The appellant and his wife now deceased left her family home and accompanied her husband to return to his family home. She never reached her husband’s family home; her body was later found dead in her pool of blood battered with knife cuts and wounds all over her body along the road leading from the deceased’s home close to the appellant’s home. The appellant ran into the bush for two weeks until he was found by the Police and later arrested and upon completion of investigation by the Police during which he confessed killing his wife with his knife, he was eventually charged as stated above with murder of his wife.

Being dissatisfied with his conviction at page 69 of the record of appeal, in accordance with the law, Appellant personally signed the notice of appeal and raised therein two grounds of appeal as follows:-

“(1) The learned trial Judge erred in law in convicting me as the evidence he believe does not establish the essential ingredients of murder.

(2) The decision of the learned trial Judge is altogether unreasonable, unwarranted and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence adduced during the trial of the case before the court.”

With the leave of this court, learned counsel for the appellant sought and was granted leave to amend the ground of appeal. The amendment was just to add an additional one ground of appeal as ground 3 which is hereby set down below:-

“(3) The trial, conviction and sentence passed on the Accused/Appellant by the learned trial Judge are a nullity in that the accused was not arraigned in accordance with the mandatory provisions of Section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Law.

PARTICULARS

(a) Charge No. HME/2C/82 was struck out and the accused person discharged on 27/7/83 by Okoroafor J.