Hajiya Binta Kuraye V. Federal Republic Of Nigeria (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ABUBAKAR DATTI YAHAYA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The appellants were arraigned before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja on two count charges, by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission. The charges are:-

COUNT ONE

“That you Hajiya Binta Kuraye and Umita Construction and Supply Company Ltd on or about the 22nd of March 2012, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory with intent to defraud did issue a GTBank cheque No. 00000090 dated the 22nd March 2012 for the sum of N9,000,000.00 to one Claire Uzoamaka Arinze which cheque on presentation was dishonoured for lack of sufficient funds in the account and thereby committed an offence contrary to section 1(1)(b) of the Dishonoured Cheques (Offences) Act Cap D11 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 and punishable under section 1(1)(i) of the same Act.

COUNT TWO

That you Hajiya Binta Kuraye and Umita Construction and supply Company Ltd on or about the 22nd of March 2012 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory with intent to defraud did issue a GTBank cheque No. 00000091 dated the 22nd March 2012 for the sum of N8,500,000 to one Claire Uzoamaka Arinze which cheque on presentation was dishonoured for lack of sufficient funds in the account and thereby committed an offence contrary to section 1(1)(b) of the Dishonoured Cheques (Offences) Act Cap D11 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 and punishable under section 1(1)(i) of the same Act.

Trial of the appellants as the accused persons, commenced and on the 25th of December 2013, Jantiku Ijudigal Mamza as the 1st prosecution witness, was called and he began to testify. He informed the trial court that a Petition was written on behalf of Claire Arinze and sent to the EFCC. The petition was dated 30/05/11 he said, and that it had cheques dated 22/03/11 attached to it.

The petition and the cheques were sought to be tendered in evidence but the defence objected to their admissibility, because the dates were not correct. It turned out that the petition was dated 30/05/12, and not 30/05/11 as the witness had said in his oral evidence. Again, the cheques were actually dated 22/03/12 and not 22/03/11 as stated by the witness.

The trial court heard both sides on it and in its Ruling, held that the documents were relevant and admissible, and despite the wrong dates stated in the oral evidence, it admitted them in evidence as Exhibits A – A6. It was this Ruling admitting the documents in evidence, that gave birth to this appeal vide the Notice of appeal filed on the 20/3/13.

Parties have filed their briefs. The appellant’s brief was settled by her counsel, Mr. Y. Mamman and filed on 23/1/14 but deemed filed on the 27/2/14. In it, a lone issue for determination was identified and it is –

Whether the learned trial judge was right to have admitted the document which the witness gave a different date in evidence at the trial?

The respondent’s brief was settled by Mr. C. O. Ugwu and was filed on the 20/2/14, but was deemed filed on 27/2/14. It also identified one issue thus-

Whether the learned trial judge was right in admitting the documents in evidence vis-a-vis the oral evidence of PW1.

As the issue identified by the appellant is similar to the one identified by the respondent, I shall utilise the issue raised by the appellant in resolving this appeal.