Sirajo Muhammed V. The State (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ABDU ABOKI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of Katsina State High Court delivered on 28/11/2006 by S. A. Mahuta J. Whereby the Appellant was convicted and sentenced to death for the offence of Armed Robbery.

The charge against the Appellant who was the 2nd accused person and two other accused persons he was charged along with is adumbrated as follows;

THE CHARGE:

“COUNT ONE:

That you (1) Basiru Nalado, (2) Sirajo Muhammd “Dondos” and (3) Nura Sabo on or about the 30th day of January, 2002 at Kankiya in Kankiya Local Government Area of Kastina State did an act to wit; robbed one Alhaji Abubakar Sani of the same address of the following:-

(i) N417,000.00

(ii) One Video Recorder valued at N18,000.00.

(iii) One bundle of Shadda Material valued at N10,000.00

(iv) One Satellite Receiver with Remote Control.

At the time of the robbery you were armed with Cutlasses, Knives, Clubs and Sticks with which you threatened to kill him and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 1 (2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provision) Act Cap. 398 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990 as amended.

COUNT TWO:

That you (1) Basiru Nalado (2) Sirajo Muhammed “Dondos’ and (3) Nura Sabo sometimes in April, 2002 at Kankiya in Kankiya Local Government Area of Katsina State did an act to wit; robbed one Hassana Bashir Babba of the same address of the sum of N250,000.00 and Gold Necklace; and at the time of the robbery you were armed with Knives, Clubs and Sticks with which you threatened to kill her and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 1 (2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provision) Act Cap. 398 laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990 as amended.”

The Appellant pleaded not guilty to the 2 counts charge. To prove its case the prosecution called 6 witnesses and tendered 3 Exhibits. The Appellant and 2 other accused persons called 9 witnesses. At the close of their case the prosecution and the defence counsels, were given the opportunity to address the Court.