Basil Akpa V. The State (2006)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

KEKERE-EKUN, J.C.A.

The appellant in this appeal was arraigned before the High Court of Katsina State on a one-count charge as follows:

“That you Basil Akpa on or about the 3rd day of December, 1989 at about 18.30 hours at Jibia within Jibia Local Government Area committed culpable homicide punishable with death in that you caused the death of Ikechukwu Njoku by doing an act to wit: butchering him and throwing his legs and hands into a pit latrine with the intention and knowledge that his death would be the probable consequence of your act and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 221 of the Penal Code.”

He pleaded not guilty to the charge.

At the trial, two witnesses testified for the prosecution while the appellant testified in his own defence and did not call any other witness. The prosecution tendered four exhibits. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Judge in a considered judgment delivered on 11/8/97, found the appellant guilty of the offence charged and sentenced him to die by hanging.

Dissatisfied with the judgment, the appellant has appealed to this court by his notice of appeal dated 9th October, 1997 containing five grounds of appeal. Pursuant to an order of this court, the appellant filed an amended notice of appeal on 11th May, 2005. The amended notice of appeal also contains five grounds of appeal. The grounds of appeal as contained in the amended notice of appeal are set out hereunder:

“Ground 1

The decision of the learned trial Judge is unwarranted and unreasonable having due regard to the evidence and the length of time for trial.

Ground 2

The learned trial Judge misdirected himself on facts and came to a wrong decision which is erroneous in law by relying solely on exhibit “3” (confessional statement) in convicting and sentencing the appellant.

Particulars, Errors and Misdirection

(i) The appellant denied the signature on the confessional statement (exhibit 3) being his own.

(ii) It is well established that where appellant denied a signature, less weight should be attached to it.

(iii) The said exhibit “3” was tendered and objected to by the appellant (sic) counsel on 27/9/92 while trial within trial was conducted on 16/7/96.