BENSON OBIAKOR V. THE STATE - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

BENSON OBIAKOR V. THE STATE

THE “CAROLINE MAERSK” SISTER VESSEL TO MV “CHRISTIAN MAERSK” V. NOKOY INVESTMENT LIMITED
June 18, 2025
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONDO STATE VS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION & ORS
June 18, 2025
THE “CAROLINE MAERSK” SISTER VESSEL TO MV “CHRISTIAN MAERSK” V. NOKOY INVESTMENT LIMITED
June 18, 2025
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONDO STATE VS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION & ORS
June 18, 2025
Show all

BENSON OBIAKOR V. THE STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (2002) Legalpedia (SC) 01619

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Jun 7, 2002

Suit Number: SC. 327/2001

CORAM


FATAYI WILLAMS, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


1. BENSON OBIAKOR2. NGOZIKA OBIAKOR APPELLANTS


DEFENDANTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellants were convicted for conspiracy to commit murder. The evidence against them was that their child took out the deceased to play before her death and that the 2nd appellant refused interrogation of the son. The 1st appellant, after torture by soldiers, requested a search to be carried out in the area in which the body of the deceased was found.


HELD


The court held that the facts established only raise a suspicion and that the circumstantial evidence did not establish the quilt of the appellants with certainty.


ISSUES


1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in affirming the conviction and sentence of the 1st and 2nd appellants (husband and wife) of a Christian marriage for conspiracy to murder committed by themselves alone contrary to Section 34 of the Criminal Code, Laws of Bendel State 1976, Cap. 48, (applicable to Delta State of Nigeria)

2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in affirming the conviction of the 1st appellant for conspiracy to murder when the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the substantive count of murder.

3. Whether having regard to the evidence the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the 1st appellant.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


THE ROLE OF SUSPICION IN CRIMINAL LAW


It is well settled that suspicion however strong cannot constitute a crime or ground a conviction – Kalgo J.S.C


WHEN CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CAN GROUND CONVICTION


Circumstantial evidence to ground conviction it must lead to one and only one conclusion i.e. the guilt of the accused – Kalgo J.S.C.


CASES CITED


Agbachom v. The State (1970) All NLR 69 at 76;
Miller v. Minister of Pensions (1947) 2 All E.R 373;
Okpulor v. The State (1990) 7 NWLR (pt. 164) 581 at 593
Babalola v. State (1989) 4 NWLR (pt. 115) 264;


STATUTES REFERRED TO


NONE


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.