CORAM

---

KARIBI-WHYTE – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAHI MUNTAKA COOMASSIE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

BELGORE – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OLATAWURA – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

A.I. KATSINA-ALU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

---

PARTIES

---

ABDU MOHAMMED APPELLANTS

---

RESPONDENTS

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appeal is brought against the concurrent findings of the lower court against the conviction of the appellant. The contention of the appellant is there is need for corroboration of the sole witness upon which his conviction is grounded on.

---

HELD

---

Appeal dismissed.

---

ISSUES

---

1. Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in holding that corroboration was not required either by statute or by a rule of practice before convicting the appellant for an offence of Culpable Homicide punishable with death under Section 221(b) of the Penal Code?2. Whether corroboration of the evidence of PW.1 was necessary before the appellant could be convicted on the facts and circumstances of this case?3. Whether it was safe to affirm the conviction of the appellant on the unreliable evidence of PW.1 Muktari Usman inspite of the complaints that the contradictions, omissions and irreconcilables replete in his evidence rendered it doubtful?4. Was the Court of Appeal right in its treatment of the complaint relating to the improper reception and suppression of appellant’s statement to the Police and whether the Court of Appeal could have discharged the appellant on that ground?5. Whether the facts of the case hinged on circumstantial evidence and if so, is the circumstantial evidence so cogent, compelling and so direct as to suggest that the appellant’s act was probable enough to cause death?

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

CONVICTION ON THE EVIDENCE OF ONE WITNESS

---

“there is no rule or law of practice which should make a court hesitate in convicting upon the evidence of one witness, in a case where there is no suggestion that the witness is an accomplice, if the court is satisfied with the evidence given” (Per Uche Omo JSC citing with approval the ratio in Igbo v. The State (1975) 9-11 SC)

---

CASES CITED

---

1. Commissioner of Police v Kwashie 14 WACA. 319.2. Igbo v. The State (1975) 9-11 SC.3. Oteki v. Attorney-General of Bendel State (1986) 2 NWLR. (Pt. 24) 648.4. Onubogu v The State (1974)9 SC.1(Reprint)1(1974)4 UILR Part IV page 538; (1974) 9 SC. 1 (20)5. Summer and Leivesley v. Grown & Co.(1909) 25 TL.R. 7456. Aruna v. The State (1990) 6 NWLR. (Pt. 155)130.7. Ikem v. The State (1985) 1 NWLR. (Pt. 2) 3788. Asanya v. The State (1991) 3 NWLR. (Pt. 180), 422

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

1. The Penal Code2. The Evidence Act.

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT