Anastatius Uwakwe V. The State (1974)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

S. SOWEMIMO, J.S.C.

In this appeal the court quashed the sentence imposed by the lower court as being excessive and substituted one year for the three years’ .

The appeal against the conviction on a charge of dangerous driving of a motor vehicle which caused the death of a person, contrary to section 17(2) of the Road Traffic Law Cap. 116 in Volume 6 of the Laws of Eastern Nigeria, 1963, now applicable in the East Central State of Nigeria, was dismissed.

The issues which arose and which were argued before us dealt with the severity of the sentence and were:

(1) That the appellant was a first offender;

(2) That he was a learner driver of three months duration under the statutory guidance of a qualified driver;

(3) That the evidence of the dangerous driving was that he (the appellant) swerved from the tarmac without reason, on to the grass verge thereby colliding with a cyclist, who later died from injuries sustained.

The learned trial judge, in determining the sentence to inflict, had this to say:

“Court:-I take into account the passionate plea of counsel for the accused for leniency but I cannot over-look my duty to discourage the rampant destruction of lives of other road users by motor drivers. The penalty of this court is that the accused will go to prison for 3 years with hard labour…”

By giving the above reasons, the learned trail judge’s decision to treat a first offender in the way he had done was based on the rampant fatal injuries caused by qualified drivers. We were of the opinion that no consideration was given to the instant case, in which the appellant was a learner driver with only three months’ experience and was at the material time under the guidance of a qualified driver. We were of the view that, if consideration had been giving to the fact that (a) the appellant was a learner driver, (b) that he was at the material time a learner driver under the control and guidance of a qualified driver, and that (c) besides the vehicle involved in the accident there was no other vehicle on the road at the material time, the learned trial judge might have considered whether in the circumstances of the case, a sentence of three years’ imprisonment with hard labour out of the maximum sentence of 5 years’ punishment fixed for the offence was appropriate.

There are cases in which the West African Court of Appeal had given reason for enhancement or reduction of sentence on appeals before it. The Supreme Court of Nigeria is invested with similar powers. The power of Supreme Court of Nigeria to hear appeals on sentences is set out in section 26(3) of the Supreme Court Act.

That sub-section reads:

“On an appeal against sentence or, subject to the special provisions of this Act, on an appeal against conviction, the Supreme Court shall if it thinks that a different sentence should have been passed, quash the sentence passed at the trial and pass such other sentence warranted in law (whether more or less severe) in substitution therefore as it thinks ought to have been passed, and if not of that opinion shall, in the case of an appeal against sentence, dismiss the appeal.”

Section 4(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1907 Cap. 23 (England) is in pari materia with the above provisions.