Prof. Festus David Kolo V. Commissioner Of Police (2017)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

CLARA BATA OGUNBIYI, J.S.C.

This is an appeal against the decision of the Appellate session of Jigawa State High Court delivered on 17/09/2013 in appeal No. JDU/14/CA/2013 which affirmed the judgment of the lower trial Magistrate Court Kiyawa, Jigawa State wherein the appellant was convicted summarily for the offence of enticing a married woman contrary to Section 389 of the Penal Code and sentenced to two months term of imprisonment without on option of fine.

Upon his conviction and sentence by the trial Magistrate, the appellants was dissatisfied and lodged an appeal before the appellate Division of the Jigawa State High Court and raised a sole issue to wit:-

“Whether or not the lower trial Magistrate, “Senior Magistrate has jurisdiction to try and determine the offence under Section 389 of Penal Code Laws of Jigawa State.

After hearing argument from both sides, the High Court in its reserved judgment delivered on 17/09/2013, dismissed the appeal and held inter alia:-

“We have perused the certified printed record of proceedings and found that there is substantial compliance with Section

1

157 of the Criminal Procedure Code. We therefore have no reasons to tamper with same.

Unsuccessful at the High Court, the appellant appealed further to the Court of Appeal (the Court below) which in its decision affirmed the judgment of the Jigawa State High Court.

Again and being unhappy with the decision of the lower Court, the appellant is now before us vide his notice of appeal filed on the 22nd December, 2014

Briefly the statements of facts leading to this appeal are as follows:-

The appellant is a Professor and a Lecturer at the Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Kaduna State while the victim (married woman) was his student of the University. He was arraigned before a Chief Magistrate Court, Kiyawa, some twenty five kilometers from Dutse, for enticing a married woman contrary to Section 389 of the Penal Code.

The appellant was arraigned while in company of his counsel, one Mr. Gausu Esq., and having pleaded guilty to the contents of the First Information Report (FIR). It was disclosed on the face of the FIR that the appellant had confessed to the Commission of the offence during police investigation.

It was stated clearly on the face of