ALHAJI MANU BODEJO VS MAIKUDI SUNKAMI

CORAM

PARTIES

ALHAJI MANU BODEJO APPELLANTS

MAIKUDI SUNKAMI RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant at the lower court filed a direct complaint before the Chief Magistrate that the Respondent and one Hammanjoda Julde trespassed on his farmland cutting down some trees therein. At the end of the trial, the Chief Magistrate sentenced and convicted the Respondent for the offence of trespass. The Respondent appealed to the High Court and the conviction and sentence was set aside. Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial court, the Appellant sought and was granted leave to appeal by the lower court and he filed his Notice of Appeal but later obtained the leave of this court to amend same and it was deemed filed and served on 11/04/2019 and the Notice of Appeal was on five grounds; the Appellant abandoned ground four (4) of the grounds of Appeal and it was therefore struck out. The Respondent filed his Brief to which the Appellant also filed a Reply Brief. All processes filed with the leave of court, was deemed properly filed and served.

HELD

Appeal Dismissed

ISSUES

Whether Appeal No. ADSE/4CA/2016 I s incompetent before the Lower Court and if yes, whether the Lower Court was in error to assume jurisdiction on the appeal Whether the noncompliance with Section 281(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code Cap. 39 Laws of Adamawa State 1997 and Order 47 Rule 1 of Adamawa State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2013 is a mere irregularity which cannot render Appeal No. ADSE/4CA/2016 incompetent Whether the lower Court acted in error when it quashed the entire decision of the trial Magistrate Court Jada without regard to the fact that, the Respondent’s Co-Accused in the person of Hammanjoda Julde is not a party to Appeal No. ADSE/4CA/2016 and did not appeal against the decision of the trial Magistrate Court

RATIONES DECIDENDI

APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF A MAGISTRATE COURT IN ADAMAWA STATE TO THE HIGH COURT – STATUTE REGULATING APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF A MAGISTRATE COURT IN ADAMAWA STATE TO THE HIGH COURT

“It is important to state here that an appeal from a decision of a Magistrate Court in Adamawa State to the High Court is regulated by the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code Law Cap. 39 Laws of Adamawa State (CPC) and Order 47 of the Adamawa State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2013 (ASHCR). Section 279 (1) of the CPC provides:-
“Appeals from a magistrate’s court to the High Court shall be in accordance with the High Court Law or this Criminal Procedure or any rules made under either of such laws”.

COMMENCEMENT OF APPEAL – MODE OF COMMENCEMENT OF AN APPEAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISION OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF ADAMAWA STATE

“By virtue of section 280 (1) of the CPC an Appeal can be commenced at the registry of the trial court or the appeal court. The section provides:-
“An appeal in accordance with the provisions of this chapter shall be commenced by the appellant giving to the registrar of the court from which the appeal is brought or to the registrar of the court to which the appeal is brought notice of such appeal which may be verbal or in writing, and if verbal, shall be forthwith reduced to writing by the registrar and signed by the appellant, or by a legal practitioner if the legal practitioner is representing him.”
The lower court was therefore on a sound footing when it held at page 163 of the printed record that:-
“I am of the view that even with the above quoted provision of the law it is beyond any argument that the Notice of Appeal filed before the registry of this honourable court is not only valid but competent.”
In other words the notice of appeal filed at the registry of the lower court was quite in order and competent. See on this C.B.N. V. Okojie (2004) 10 NWLR (PART 882) 488 Page 512 at 513”.

APPEAL – WHETHER AN APPEAL CAN BE DECLARED INCOMPETENT BY VIRTUE OF ANY DEFECT THEREIN

“Furthermore by the provision of Order 47 Rule 17 of Adamawa State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules an Appeal will not be declared incompetent by virtue of error or defect therein. The order provides:-
“No objection shall be taken or allowed, on any appeal, to any notice of appeal which is in writing or to any recognizance entered into under this order for the due prosecution of the appeal for any alleged error or defect therein…..”
–

FINDINGS OF FACT – ATTITUDE OF THE APPELLATE COURT TO THE FINDINGS OF THE LOWER COURT WHERE SAME IS NOT PERVERSE

“I have carefully gone through the record of proceedings of the trial Chief Magistrate Court, Jada especially the evidence of the prosecution and defence witnesses contained at pages 8 – 13 of the Record of Appeal and observe that the Appellant before the trial court did not make out a case of criminal trespass against the Respondent. As such there was no justification for convicting the Respondent as the lower court held. This court will therefore not interfere with the findings of the lower court since it is not perverse. See Oguntayo V. Adelaja & Ors. (2009) 6 – 7 S.C. (Part 11) 91 and Anaekwe V. Nweke (2014) All FWLR (Part 739) 1154 at 1156 Paragraphs D – E. Furthermore, the lower court was right when it set aside the entire judgment of the trial court since the Respondent vide his notice of appeal before the lower court reflected at page 6 of the record of appeal sought for:-
“An order setting aside the judgment of the trial court delivered on the 3rd day of August, 2016 as it affects the appellant, thus discharging and acquitting the Appellant.
–