Olaseni Akinyemi Aiyeola V. The State (1969)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

FATAYI-WILLIAMS, Ag J. S.C.

In the High Court at Lagos the appellant as first accused was jointly charged with one Lazarus Dike (2nd accused) on three counts, namely:- (1) Conspiracy to commit felony contrary to section 516 of the Criminal code; (2) Stealing, contrary to section 3900 (4) (f) of the said Code; and (3)Attempt to commit felony contrary to section 509 of the said Code.  There is also another count of personation which concerned only the second accused.

The particulars of the count dealing with conspiracy state that both accused between the months of May and June, 1968 at Surulere, Lagos, conspired together and with other persons unknown to commit felony, the felony being that of obtaining money by false pretences. Those pertaining to the second count state that the two accused persons between the same months as aforesaid at Lagos stole a land certificate No. LO4383 dated 30th May, 1962, property of the Lagos State Government from the Lagos Lands Registry where it was kept. The learned trial judge found both of them guilty on the first, the appellant alone guilty on the second, and both of them not guilty on the third count.

It is against this conviction that the appellant has now appealed to this Court. Succinctly stated, the case for the prosecution is this. Sometime in April 1968, one Aig Imoukhuede (p.w. 2) took the land certificate (exh. ‘A’) to the Lands Registry in Lagos to have a charge on the property removed. About two weeks later Imoukhuede received a letter dated 7th May, 1986, (exh. ‘J) informing him that work on the certificate had been completed and that he could come to the office and collect it. He later went to the Lands Registry to collect the certificate but it could not be found by Onikoyi (p.w. 6). As a result, Onikoyi, without informing Pratt (p.w. 5) the Deputy Registrar of Titles, gave Imoukhuede land certificate (exh.‘B’).

Exh. ‘B’ contained the same particulars as the missing certificate. Meanwhile on or about the 12th. June, 1968 the appellant, who is a legal practitioner, went to see Abudu, another legal practitioner, in his chambers in Lagos with the lost land certificate (exh. ‘A’). The appellant informed Abudu that the land certificate belonged to one Aig Imoukhuede who wanted to sell the property at 19 Norman Williams Street in respect of which the certificate had been issued, for £6,000. After Abudu had informed him that he had a client who might be interested the appellant left leaving the certificate with Abudu.

Abudu thereupon contacted Dr. Senbanjo (p. w.10) one of his clients and informed him that the property at 19 Norman Williams Street was for sale. Senbanjo then went to see the house where he met Imoukhuede (p. w. 2), who informed him that the house was not for sale.

On receiving this information Senbanjo got in touch with Abudu by telephone and informed him that Imoukhuede, the landlord, said that he was not selling the house. Nevertheless on the following day, Senbanjo went to see Imoukhuede again, accompanied by his Solicitor Mr. Akinyede.

He had with him the letter (exh. ‘F’) from Abudu asking the occupier to permit Dr. Senbanjo to inspect the premises. When he saw Senbanjo a second time Imoukhuede was furious. Sensing that something “fishy” was going on, Senbanjo discontinued the negotiation for the property. As a result of the conversation he had with Senbanjo, Imoukhuede telephoned Abudu and asked why he was sending people to inspect his house when it was not for sale.

Consequent upon what Abudu told him, Imoukhuede made an appointment to see Abudu in his office that same evening, 13th June, 1968, taking with him the second land certificate (exh. ‘B’). Before Imoukhuede’s arrival, however, the appellant had called on Abudu again and Abudu had asked him to produce the owner of the property. In the meantime Imoukhuede arrived at Abudu’s office and showed him the land certificate (exh. ‘B’). On seeing exh. B Abudu showed Mr. Imoukhuede the other land certificate (exh. ‘A’) which the appellant had earlier given to him in respect of the same property. Imoukhuede recognised exh. PAGE| 3 A as the certificate which he had taken to the Lands Registry in April 1968 but which could not be found when he went back to collect it.

Pursuant to this discovery, Imoukhuede claimed exh. ‘A’ but Abudu refused to let him have it. Instead Abudu told Imoukhuede to meet him in the Lands Registry the following morning. Imoukhuede then left. Not long after, the appellant returned to Abudu’s office with the 2nd accused whom he introduced to Abudu as Mr. Imoukhuede. After further discussion during which the selling price was reduced to £4,000 to be paid in costs, it was agreed that they should call at Abudu’s office the following morning to collect the money after executing the necessary papers.

The following morning Imoukhuede went to the Lands Registry to lodge a complaint about the lost certificate with Mr. Pratt, the Deputy Registrar of Titles (p. w. 5), who after further enquiry called in the police. While Pratt, Imoukhuede, and the    police officers who had been called in were discussing the matter, Abudu turned up at the Lands Registry. All of them then went to the Igbosere Magistrate’s Court where they saw the appellant who asked Abudu if everything was all right.

Abudu then observed that it would appear that the certificate which he had handed to him the previous day was not genuine as there was another one with the same name and particulars. To this observation the appellant replied that if Abudu’s client was no longer interested in the property Abudu should return the certificate (exh. ‘A’) to him. Abudu then informed him that the matter had gone beyond that stage, that the police had been called in and would like to know more about the transaction. After further discussion, they all went to Abudu’s office where they were told that the man who had earlier called at Abudu’s office in the company of the appellant and had been introduced to Abudu as Mr. Imoukhuede at the time had been waiting for Abudu but had just left to get some food. He was, however, apprehended later, and charged with the appellant. On being charged with conspiracy and stealing, the appellant made two statements (exhs. ‘P’ and ‘Q’) to the police. In the first statement (exh. ‘Q’) he said, inter alia, as follows:- “On Monday, 10th June, 1968, one person named John Isibor approached me in my chambers at my house at 46, Falolu Road, Surulere, with this document and reminded me that I have seen him before in company of one Mr. Akinola who I know quite well and who lives at 5, Buari Street, Mushin. Anyway I asked for his mission and he told me of a property to be sold and that the document in his hand was the relevant document. I took the document and examined it.

I have no cause to doubt the genuineness of the document, but I told him that I am no longer interested in properties belonging to non-Yorubas in Lagos. However I promised him to consult a colleague of mine and hear his views and informed him to call in again the following day.

I went to Mr. S. O. O. Abudu, solicitor, of 126, Nnamdi Azikiwe same day in the evening and told him of the matter”. He then went to describe how Abudu, after taking the document asked to see the owner, and how after passing on the information to John Isibor, one man called on him two days later and introduced himself as Mr. Imoukhuede whom he later took to Abudu. Because of this information concerning Akinola the police went with the appellant to look for him but he was not at home. The police, however, searched Akinola’s room and took away some documents.