Tukur Halilu V. The State (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

OLUDOTUN ADEBOLA ADEFOPE-OKOJIE, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Katsina State delivered by Hon. Justice I. B. Ahmed on 5th June 2014, convicting the Appellant for the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death pursuant to Section 221 of the Penal Code.

Dissatisfied with the judgment, the Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal, dated 28th August 2014, containing five Grounds of Appeal. Briefs of Argument were filed in accordance with the rules of Court.

In the Appellant’s Brief of Arguments, dated and filed on 22/09/2014, settled by Lanre Olaoluwa, Bayo Omole and Bayo Adetomiwa of Matrix Solicitors, four issues for determination were raised, to wit:

1. Whether considering the circumstance-of the abandonment of the Appellant’s case by his counsel and the failure of the trial judge to avail an opportunity of legal representation as guaranteed by the Constitution, the Appellant’s right to fair hearing was not breached.
2. Whether having regard to the failure of the prosecution to investigate the defence of Alibi put forward by the Appellant, the

trial Court was right when it held that the defence of alibi could not avail the Appellant.

3. Whether having regard to the clear evidence of the torture and duress which the Appellant was subjected to by the police, the learned trial judge was not wrong when he held that the Confessional Statement of the Appellant was voluntarily mode? And whether it was right to have relied on the controverted Confessional Statement in convicting the Appellant.
4. Whether despite the absence of a positive element of intention, the trial Court was right when it held that the prosecution had proved the case of culpable homicide against the Appellants beyond reasonable doubt.

The Respondent, in its Brief of Arguments, settled by Aminu Garba of the Attorney General’s Chambers, Ministry of Justice Katsina State dated 27/02/2015 and filed on 2/3/15, adopted the issues for determination raised by the Appellant’s Counsel.

I shall accordingly adopt these issues, abridged for succinctness and subsuming the 3rd issue raised under the 4th issue, as follows:

1. Whether the Appellant’s right to fair hearing was breached?
2. Whether, having regard to the

failure of the prosecution to investigate the defence of Alibi put forward by the Appellant, the trial Court was right when it held that the defence of Alibi could not avail the Appellant?

3. Whether the trial Judge proved the guilt of the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt?

The 1st issue for determination is:

Whether the Appellant’s right to fair hearing was breached?

Counsel to the Appellant has complained that, following the abandonment by the Appellant’s Counsel of his defence, the trial Judge was obligated to secure alternative Counsel for him, the failure of which has resulted in the breach of his rights, as guaranteed by Section 36(6) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and Section 185 of the Criminal Procedure Code, thus rendering the trial a nullity.

They cited the following cases:

Calabar Central Co-Operative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd v Ekpo (2008) 6 NWLR Pt.1083 Page 362 at 398; E. Onochie v. Odogwu (2006) 6 NWLR part 975 page 65; Josiah v State (1985) 1 NWLR Part 1 Page 125 and Udo v State (1988) 3 NWLR Part 82 Page 316.

?Learned Counsel argued that by these?authorities, a judge is obliged to ensure that a