Obed Ikechukwu Kanu & Ors. V. State (1993)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

EDOZIE, J.C.A.

This appeal is against the judgment of the Umuahia High Court in Charge No. HU/5C/87 delivered by Maranzu J. on 12th January, 1990. The four appellants, members of one family, are from 1st to the 4th, a son, a daughter, a mother and a father respectively of Kanu family of Umuokoroala Afugiri, Umuahia. They were charged on information for the offence of murder contrary to section 319(1) of the Criminal Code, Cap.30 Volume 2, Laws of Eastern Nigeria 1963 applicable in Imo State. The particular of offence alleged that on 22nd of November, 1986, at Umuokoroala Afugiri in the Umuahia Judicial Division they murdered one Vincent Nwosu, hereinafter referred to as the deceased.

The deceased, Vincent Nwosu, was the husband of the 2nd appellant, Urumma Nwosu on account of a matrimonial dispute between them, the 2nd appellant deserted her matrimonial home to live with her parents and brother, that is, the 4th, 3rd and 1st appellants. The deceased approached his in-laws for settlement of the dispute between him and his wife (2nd appellant). A meeting to that effect was agreed upon and slated for the 22nd of November, 1986 in the house of the 4th appellant. On that day, the deceased with his mother Ezioma Nwosu (P.W.4) and other relations attended the reconciliation meeting in the house of the 4th appellant. The four appellants with other relations of theirs were also present at the meeting which took place in the parlour or sitting room of the 4th appellant. As the deliberations progressed, the 2nd appellant supported by her mother the 3rd appellant stated her case after which the deceased Vincent Nwosu also supported by his mother Ezioma Nwosu (P.W.4) presented his own case. Thereafter the arbitrators, consisting of the invited relations on both sides retired to another house to deliberate on their verdict. It was during this interval that the events which culminated in the charge of the appellants took place.

According to the prosecution, as the arbitrators left the venue of the meeting, they left behind them all the four appellants, the deceased, Vincent Nwosu, his mother (P.W.4) and one Johnson Amaechi Ekenyere (P.W.1) a brother-in-law of the deceased. The P.W.1 and P.W.4 gave an eye witness account of what transpired in the sitting room of the 4th appellant after the arbitrators had left to consider their verdict. According to them, the 2nd appellant declared that whatever the arbitrators might decide, she was not prepared to resume cohabitation with her husband, the deceased. To that declaration, the deceased retorted that if his wife the 2nd appellant refused to return to him, then her parents-would refund to him the bride price and all he spent in marrying her. Apparently incensed, the 1st appellant, aged 20, in his youthful exuberance emerged from the inner room and slapped the deceased on the face and rebuked him for the utterances he made. Thereupon, all the other three appellants joined the 1st appellant in attacking the deceased and in the melee, the deceased was overpowered and beaten to death. During the attack, the prosecution alleged inter alia, that the 1st appellant gave the deceased a fist blow on the nape, the 4th appellant squeezed the throat while the 2nd and 3rd appellants knocked the deceased’s head on the ground accompanied by a statement by the 3rd appellant that the deceased should die if he wanted to. It was further alleged that during the attack on the deceased by the appellants, the 1st appellant procured a matcher to cut the deceased into pieces but he was disarmed by the 2nd appellant who sustained injury in the process. Medical evidence of P.W.2 was that the deceased died of asphyxia due likely to an interference in the oxygen intake which could have resulted from gagging the mouth and nostrils or gripping the neck to reduce oxygen intake and increase the accumulation of carbon-dioxide.

Each of the appellant gave evidence on oath denying the charge of murdering the deceased. Their case was that there was an exchange of punches between the 1st appellant and the deceased which made the deceased fell on an iron bed and thereby hit the nape or back of his head on the iron bed resulting in his collapse as he pursued the 1st appellant. It was further the case of the 1st appellant that the matcher he procured was merely to frighten the deceased who unknown to him had died. All the four appellants denied the presence or participation of the 4th appellant in the incident. It was also the case of the defence that P.W.1 was not present. In support of their case, the appellants also called D.W.5 as a witness.

After considering the evidence adduced by both sides and the submissions of learned counsel, the learned trial Judge accepted the prosecution’s case, rejected that of the defence and accordingly convicted and sentenced each of the appellants to death for the murder. To their amended notice of appeal are dove-tailed the following grounds of appeal:-

“Ground One

That the judgment is unfair, unreasonable and unwarranted having regard to the evidence properly proved and admitted at the trial.

Ground Two

The learned trial Judge erred in law when he relied on the testimonies of P.W.I and P.WA to convict all the accused persons when:-

(a) The oral testimonies of both witnesses had been discredited by their previous statement to the police admitted in evidence as Exhibits “A” and “B” respectively;

(b) The testimonies of both witnesses were contradictory of each other on very material issues;

(c) Exhibit “A” contradicted the oral testimony of P.W.1; thereby rendering two witnesses (sic) unreliable and thus irrelevant, being of no probative value in deciding whether the accused committed the offence alleged or not.

Ground Three