Samson Okoruwa & Anor Vs The State (1975)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

O. ELIAS, C.J.N. 

On Thursday, April 24, 1975, we heard the appeal from the judgment of Omo Eboh, J., given in Charge No. U/11c/71 at the High Court at Ubiaja, Mid-Western State of Nigeria, in which he purported to have sentenced each of the two accused persons to 5 years’ imprisonment I.H.L. on the 1st count of manslaughter, but in which he did not pronounce sentence on the 2nd count of negligent driving in respect of both accused persons.

Of the five grounds of appeal filed before us, Mr. Ihensekhien, learned counsel for the appellant who alone has appealed, began by arguing the first ground which reads as follows:-

“The Learned Trial Judge erred in Law in so far as:-
(a) He sentenced the appellant before conviction.

(b) The judgment was not reduced into writing and signed and dated before it was “dictated.”

(c) He sentenced the appellant before judgment.

(d) The judgment was reduced into writing, dated and signed when he was already functus officio.

(e) The judgment was never pronounced in Court.”
Learned counsel drew our attention to the following portion of the Record of Appeal, at p. 19:

“Judgment is dictated in Court.

The 1st Accused is sentenced to 5 years I.H.L. on 1st count, no sentence is given on the 2nd count.
The 2nd Accused is sentenced to 5 years I.H.L. on 1st count and no sentence is given on the 2nd count.

(Sgd.) J. Omo Eboh,
Judge, 14/8/73”

He also contrasted this passage with the following also recorded by the learned trial Judge as part of the Judgment which he apparently wrote the same day:-
“None of the two accused is desirous of an option of a fine. 1st and 2nd accused persons are sentenced to 5 years I.H.L. each on the 1st count of manslaughter.
No sentence is pronounced on the 2nd count of negligent driving in respect of both accused persons.
(Sgd.) J. Omo-Eboh,
Judge, 14/8/73”

Learned counsel submitted, and we agree with him, that the learned trial Judge was clearly in error in having “dictated” his judgment in court, as there is no provision in the law for a high court Judge to dictate his judgment in court.  Section 245 of the Criminal Procedure Act (Cap. 43) of the 1958 Edition of the Laws of the Federation, is against such a proceeding in its provision which reads as follows:-

“The Judge or magistrate shall record his judgment in writing and every such judgment shall contain the point or points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision and shall be dated and signed by  the Judge or magistrate at the time of pronouncing it: Provided that in the case of a magistrate in lieu of writing such judgment it shall be a sufficient compliance under this section if the magistrate-