N. M. Ali & Anor V. The State (1988)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

B. CRAIG, J.S.C. 

The two Appellants herein were charged before the Shaki High Court in Oyo State with murder contrary to Section 254 (4) of the Criminal Code Cap.28 of the Laws of Western Region of Nigeria 1959 made applicable to Oyo State.

The particulars on the indictment were that on the 3rd day of September 1981 along Sapeteri/Igboho Road, in the Shaki Judicial Division they murdered one Mr. S.O. Ogundare, a Superintendent of Police. Altogether 10 witnesses testified for the State and at the close of the case for the prosecution the appellants’ Counsel announced that the defendants would not give evidence on oath, but would rest their case on that of the prosecution.

At the conclusion of the whole case, the learned trial Judge (Adeniran, J.W in a reserved judgment considered the evidence before him and found the appellants guilty as charged. The appellants were dissatisfied with that judgment and appealed to the Court of Appeal on various grounds of appeal, which included some on the facts.

The Court of Appeal in a well considered judgment looked carefully into the complaints of the Appellants and came to the conclusion that the appeal lacked merit and therefore dismissed it.

The appellants have appealed further to this court on one original ground of appeal but with the leave of the court they have filed three additional grounds. Essentially these three grounds are similar to those which were canvassed before the court of appeal and they are as follows:

“GROUND ONE:

The learned trial Judge and the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law and on the facts of the case when in convicting the appellants they relied solely on the testimony of Rasaki Lalemi. The 5 P.W. to the exclusion of other independent, material and available eye witnesses.

PARTICULARS OF ERROR

1) The Testimony of Rasaki Lalemi does not induce belief because of the inherent improbability of his account of what had occurred.

(a) The late Supol Ogundare could not have approached the Three Armed Hausa men and attempted to seize all their weapons at the same time with his pistol in sheath.

(b) If the late Supol Ogundare at all fired, he could not have missed all his assailants in the circumstances of this case.

(2) The description of the attack on the deceased by the appellants as described by the appellants is different and more probable than the description of the same episode by Rasaki Lalemi, the only prosecution eye witness.

(3) The driver of the Police Land Rover, Anifowoshe did not shoot at the 1st Appellant, while the first appellant was running away from the scene of the incident as testified to by Rasaki Lalemi.