Silas Sule V. The State (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OLUFUNLOLA OYELOLA ADEKEYE, J.C.A.

The appellant Silas Sule and five others were arraigned before the High Court of Kogi State sitting at Ankpa while the charge preferred against them read as follows:-

“That you Silas Sule, Christopher Sule, Jonah Sule, Jibrin Umoru, Timothy Sule and Titi Sule on or about the 24th day of June 1999 at Ika-Efofe village via Alajo Ankpa in Ankpa Local Government of Kogi State agreed to do illegal Act to wit to commit the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death and that same act was done in pursuant of the agreement and you thereby committed an offence punishable under section 97 of the penal code.

That you Silas Sule, Christopher Sule, Jonah Sule, Jibrin Umoru, Timothy Sule and Titi Sule on or about the 24th day of June 1999 at Ika-Efofe village via Alajo Ankpa in Ankpa Local Government of Kogi State commit culpable homicide punishable with death in that you caused the death of Jubrln Umoru Okpanachi by doing an act to wit raiding the compound of the said Jubrin Umoru Okpanachi while armed with sticks, knifes and a gun and inflicting a deep stab in his right thigh with intention of causing his death.

At the trial before the High Court, five witnesses gave evidence, while all the six accused persons gave evidence in their defence. Learned counsel for both sides submitted their written addresses. In his considered judgment the learned trial judge found that the allegation of conspiracy has not been made against the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th accused persons and thereby discharged and acquitted them of the offence, while he concluded that the prosecution has proved the guilt of the 1st accused beyond reasonable doubt: having regard to the overwhelming evidence of the prosecution witnesses and convicted him for the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death under section 221 of the Penal Code.

Being dissatisfied with his conviction the appellant appealed to this court. He complied with the processes of appeal as stipulated in the Court of Appeal Rules 2002. At the hearing of the appeal the applicant relied on the appellants brief filed on 26/1/06 and the appellants Reply brief deemed filed on the 14/11/06. In the appellants brief six issues were settled for determination as follows:-

(i) Whether the trial court considered the defence of self defence raised by the appellant before arriving at the conclusion to convict him of the offence as charged on the 2nd head charge.

(ii) Whether in view of the fact that application for leave to prefer a charge against the appellant was neither moved nor granted, the trial embarked upon by the trial court is not void.

(iii) Whether the trial court was right in lumping the pleas of the appellant to the two count charges and taking them as one plea.

(iv) Whether the deceased was sufficiently identified to establish the needed nexus between the victim and the act of the appellant

(v) Did the prosecution indeed prove the guilt of the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt as required by law?

(vi) Whether having found that the evidence of the prosecution did not sufficiently establish their case of conspiracy there was any other evidence left that could sustain the charge of culpable homicide punishable with death upon which the appellant could be rightly convicted

The Respondent adopted and relied upon the Respondents brief deemed filed on 14/11/06.

The Respondent distilled four issues for determination as follows:-