Jimoh Dina V. The State (1984) LLJR-SC

Jimoh Dina V. The State (1984)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

BELLO, J.S.C.

The appellant was convicted of the murder of the deceased who was the husband of the appellant’s sister-in-law. The Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against that conviction. Both his counsel and the Principal State Counsel have nothing useful to urge in his favour at the hearing of the appeal in this Court.

The conviction was in the main based on the confessional statement of the appellant which he retracted at the trial. The evidence, other than his confession, shows that the appellant had visited the deceased’s house on the material day and there he informed his sister-in-law that he would kill the deceased’s brother whom he had suspected to have caused his wife to desert him. The deceased overheard the conversation and requested the appellant to leave his house. The appellant left the house with threat that the deceased “would see”. Thereafter the deceased went to his farm where he was found dead with matchet wounds on his neck and face.

In his confession, exhibit H, the appellant said:

“It was on Friday the 23/2/79 around 11 a.m. I went to Job’s house to report to his wife that my wife had deserted me and packed her belongings. Job’s wife said that God will provide another woman for me. While I was discussing with Job’s wife, Job was asleep. Job woke from his sleep and told me to get out of his house, and go to my father’s house. He abused me. After abusing me he went out to the farm, after a while I went to meet him in the farm.

When I met him in the farm, I told him that it was wrong to abuse me, for I could as well abuse him too. But I did not abuse him in reply. Job pushed me against a motor-cycle and I fell down with the motor-cycle. Job took a stick to beat me then I took a cutlass and struck him thrice with the cutlass and Job fell down. After he fell down, I ran into the farm. On my return journey from the farm I met his senior brother by name, Isaac Adeyemi. He told me that Job had been killed on the farm after saying that, I became afraid. I started to shake. I did not confess to him that I killed him because I was afraid.”

The other confession, exhibit G is in similar terms. I think the trial Judge acted rightly in convicting the appellant of murder in the circumstances of the case. The confession was consistent with the evidence of the appellant’s sister-in-law, PW.1, as to the conduct of the appellant before the commission of the offence and the fatal injuries found on the body of the deceased. He, the trial Judge, also found the confession was freely and voluntarily made by the appellant.

I am satisfied the appeal has no merit. It is accordingly dismissed.

Conviction and sentence are affirmed.

NNAMANI, J.S.C.: The appellant was charged with murder contrary to section and punishable under section 257 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 28 Vol. 1, Laws of Western Nigeria, 1959, in that he murdered one Job Oga. He was convicted by the High Court of the Ilaro Judicial Division, Ogun State and sentenced to death.

On appeal to the Court of Appeal, his appeal was dismissed as lacking in substance. The appellant has now appealed to this Court. Having read the records of proceedings carefully, I think that both learned counsel were right in their submissions that there is nothing that can be usefully urged in favour of the appellant. Although at the trial of the appellant in the High Court there was no eye witness of the killing, there were two confessional statements by the appellant to two different police officers which were confirmed before two different police officers and in which he admitted killing the deceased in deceased’s farm with deceased’s matchet.

Although at his trial the appellant retracted these statements and denied making any statement to the police, the learned trial Judge found that he made them and that they were positive and direct and sufficient to support the conviction of the appellant. He also sought and found evidence tending to corroborate the confessional statements of the appellant. See R vs. Sykes 8 C.A.R. 232 and Philip Kano & 1 other vs. King (1952) 12 WACA 30 at Page 32. The learned trial Judge in my view properly reviewed the evidence before him and found the appellant guilty. The appellant obviously killed the deceased because he claimed that the deceased was always abusing him and saying that he had squints in his eyes.

The learned trial Judge also considered the defence of the appellant which was total denial, as well as the defence of provocation which arose from his statement and rightly rejected them. The contention that there was no medical evidence was also rightly rejected as medical evidence though desirable is not essential when the cause of death can be inferred from surrounding circumstances. The deceased was found dead in a pool of blood with matchet cuts and his matchet was lying beside his body. See Tonara Bakuri VS. The State (1965) N.M.L.R. 163.

At the Court of Appeal, the argument of lack of medical evidence was again taken up but was rejected. Also rejected were contentions about contradictions in the testimonies of the two wives and the failure to call the Bale of Ibeku. I am satisfied that the appeal lacks substance and it is hereby dismissed. The conviction and sentence passed on the appellant are hereby further affirmed.

KAZEEM, J.S.C.: This is a case of murder in which the appellant matchetted the husband of his sister-in-law to death. He had gone to the deceased’s house at about 11a.m. on the day of the incident to report to the deceased’s wife that his own wife (her sister) had packed out of the appellant’s house and left. The deceased’s wife (P.w.1) sympathised with the appellant and prayed that God would give him another wife. It was said that the appellant then threatened to deal with his own senior brother one Abraham Dina whom he thought was responsible for his wife’s desertion.

At that stage, the deceased who was inside the room, and apparently heard the threat, emerged from the room, angrily warned the appellant for threatening to kill his senior brother, and having abused him, asked him to leave the deceased’s house. The appellant was very angry at the remarks of the deceased and having threatened to deal with him too left the deceased’s house. The deceased later left for his farm alone, while expecting his two wives (P.w.1 and P.W.3) to join him there later.

The appellant realising that the deceased would have gone to his farm went there to meet him and challenged him as to the remarks he had earlier made at his house. It was said by the appellant that the deceased thereupon pushed him against the deceased’s motor bike which fell down. The appellant then became very annoyed, picked up the deceased’s cutlass lying near by, and gave the deceased three matchet cuts which resulted in the deceased’s death. Being afraid of his act, the appellant ran away from the scene.

There was no eye-witness of the actual killing. But the appellant in two different statements to the police confessed to the killing of the deceased; and the two statements were later confirmed before two senior police officers. At the trial, the admissibility of those statements was not challenged. However, in his evidence at the trial, the appellant tried to retract the confession, and he denied either visiting the deceased’s house to report about his wife’s desertion or to visit the deceased’s farm later, let alone to kill him with a matchet.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted at the trial that there was no medical evidence as to the cause of death; but it is already settled law that medical evidence, though desirable, is not essential and where there is no medical evidence as to the cause of death, it is proper for the court to infer the cause of death from the surrounding circumstances: See Kato Dan Adamu v The Kana N.A. (1955) 1 F.S.C. 25 and J. Oamhen v The State (1984) 4 S.C. 1. In this case, the trial Judge found that the appellant’s confession adequately supplied the circumstance from which the cause of death could be inferred. Consequently, the trial Judge accepted the confessions as voluntary and true and found that the appellant could be convicted on the confession alone: See Jimoh Yesufu v The State (1976) 6 S.C. Having also considered the defence of provocation and dismissed it as untenable, the trial Judge found the appellant guilty of the offence of murdering the deceased and he sentenced him to death.

The appellant’s appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal in Ibadan was also dismissed. In a further appeal to this court the appellant’s counsel (Chief Debo Akande) and Mr. Bello P.S.C. Ogun State for the State, have nothing to urge in favour of the appellant.

Having also read the record as well as the appellant’s confession, I entirely agree that he was rightly convicted. I will accordingly dismiss the appeal, affirm the conviction for murder and sentence of death passed on the appellant.

SC.44/1984