Ugwu V. State (2020)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA, J.S.C. 

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Enugu division given on Friday 20th December, 2013. The appellant and one other had earlier been arraigned before the Enugu State High Court, sitting at the Nsukka Judicial division, on 21/07/2003.

They were charged with conspiracy to murder, and murder of Christopher Ogbonna, the Chief Security Officer of University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

The information filed by the then Attorney General of Enugu State on the said two counts charge reads thus:

Count 1-

Conspiracy – contrary to Section 494 of the Criminal Code, Cap.36, Vol.1 Laws of Anambra State of Nigeria 1986, as applicable to Enugu State of Nigeria.

Particulars:

Clement Ezeazu alias Fimmbbar and Chijioke Ugwu, alias Police on or about the 26th day of May, 2002, at No. 449, Elias Avenue, University of Nigeria, Nsukka Campus, in the Nsukka Judicial Division conspired to commit a felony – Murder.

Count 2 –

Murder – contrary to Section 274 (1) of the Criminal Code, Cap.36, Vol.1, Laws of Anambra State of Nigeria, 1986, as applicable to Enugu State of Nigeria.

Particulars:

Clement Ezeazu alias Fimmbbar and Chijioke Ugwu alias Police on or about the 26th day of May, 2002 at No. 449 Elias Avenue University of Nigeria, Nsukka Campus, in the Nsukka Judicial Division unlawfully killed Christopher Ogbonna.

Upon their arraignment and the charge read to them, their plea was taken. However, upon an application for bail pending trial brought before a vacation Judge of the High Court, in Enugu, Clement Ezeazu, the first accused was granted bail. He later jumped bail and has remained at large. Efforts to re-arrest and bring him to Court to stand trial proved abortive. Subsequently, the State with leave of the Court amended the information to drop the name of the first accused – Clement Ezeazu, leaving the appellant alone to stand the trial.

During the trial, the prosecution called eight (8) witnesses and the appellant testified in defence but called no other witness. The gist of the case goes as follows:-