Caleb Ojo & Anor V. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2005)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MARY U. PETER ODILI, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, contained in the Ruling of Mudashiru Oniyangi J, delivered on 30/10/2002, dismissing the no case submission made by the Appellants/Accused.

Being dissatisfied with the said decision, the Appellants appealed to this Court.

FACTS:

The Accused/Appellants faced a two Count Charge before the Lower Court viz.

COUNT 1:

That you Caleb Ojo (m) and Samuel Ojo (m) on or about the 9th day of July, 2002 at the Abuja Judicial Division, conspired with each other and corruptly gave the sum of N20,000.00 (Twenty Thousand Naira only) to an official of the Independent Corrupt practices and Other Related Offences Commission for the said official to issue in the course of his official duty a countermanding letter exonerating the 1st accused for allegation of corrupt practice leveled against him in his capacity as Chairman of Oriade Local Government of Osun State, in a petition being investigated by the Commission and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 26(1) (c) AND PUNISHABLE UNDER section 9(1) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.

COUNT 2:

That you Caleb Ojo (m) and Samuel Ojo (m) on or about the 9th day of July, 2002, at Rita Lori Hotel, Garki, Abuja, in the Abuja Judicial Division, did corruptly give as gratification the sum of N20,000.00 (Twenty Thousand Naira) to an official of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission to issue to 1st Accused, a letter exonerating him from allegation of corrupt practices leveled against him while serving as the Chairman Oriade Local government of Osun State in a petition under investigation by the commission and you thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 9(1) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission Act 2000.

The prosecution adduced evidence calling five witnesses at the close of prosecution’s case, the learned Counsel for the Accused/Appellants addressed the Court extensively on a no case submission. The learned Counsel for the Respondent made a reply, while learned Counsel for the Appellants made a reply on points of law. That learned trial Judge after consideration of the submissions of both counsel ruled that prima facie from the evidence of the prosecution there was need for some explanation from the accused. Accordingly, he dismissed the submission of no case, upheld the objection to the no case submission and asked the accused to proceed with their defence to the Charge.

It is against that decision that the Appellants have appealed to this Court.

RELIEF SOUGHT FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL:

To set aside the ruling of the learned trial Judge by considering all the submissions and authorities not considered by the trial Judge and to uphold the no case submission of the appellants and discharge them accordingly.

In compliance with our Rules of court, parties filed and exchanged briefs of argument.