CORAM

---

JUMMAI HANNATU SANKEY JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

IBRAHIM SHATA BDLIYA JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

EBIOWEI TOBI JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

---

PARTIES

---

ALHAJI TIJJANI HAMIDU

APPELLANTS 

---

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

APPEAL, COURT, CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE, LAW OF EVIDENCE, LEGAL PRACTITIONER, NOTABLE PRONOUNCEMENT. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, WORDS AND PHRASES

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant, Alhaji Tijjani Hamidu, was arrested following a petition that the Economic and Financial Commission (EFCC) received from one Alhaji Madu Kolo Liman against him. Upon due investigation, the Appellant was arraigned before the High Court of Borno State, on a three-count charge for the offences of obtaining money under false pretences under Section 1(1) (b) and 1(3) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006 and using as genuine a forged document under Section 366 of the Penal Code Law Cap 102, Laws of Borno State, 1994.

The Appellant pleaded not guilty. The Respondent, in proof of the charge, adduced evidence through three witnesses and several documents, while the Appellant testified in his defence and called two other witnesses. At the close of evidence and final addresses of Counsel, the learned trial Court delivered its Judgment wherein he convicted the Appellant for the offences. The Appellant was subsequently sentenced to various terms of imprisonment to run concurrently, and also ordered to pay compensation to Alhaji Modu Kolo Liman.

Dissatisfied with the trial court’s decision, the Appellant filed the instant appeal, wherein he seeks an order allowing this appeal and an order of discharge and acquittal.

 

---

HELD

---

Appeal Dismissed

 

---

ISSUES

---

Whether the learned trial Judge properly evaluated all the evidence placed before the lower Court and rightly convicted the Appellant for the offences charged of obtaining money under false pretenses and using as genuine a forged document

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

OFFENCE OF OBTAINING UNDER FALSE PRETENSE – CONDITION TO GROUND A CONVICTION UNDER SECTION 1(1)(A) AND (3) OF THE ADVANCE FEE FRAUD AND OTHER RELATED OFFENCES ACT, 2006

---

“Section 1(1) (a) and 1(3) provide as follows:

1.(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other enactment or law, any person who by any false pretence, and with intent to defraud

(a)Obtains from any other person, in Nigeria or in any other country for himself or any other person;

(3) A person who commits an offence under subsection (1) or (2) of this section is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term of not more than 20 years and not less than seven years without the option of fine.”

To ground a conviction under Section 1(1) (a) and 1(3) of the Advance Fee Fraud Act, evidence must be in place establishing, among others, that the accused pretentiously induced the complainant to part with his property or money – Adamu V FRN (2021) LPELR-53205(CA) 9, A-B. PER J.H.SANKEY, J.C.A

 

---

OFFENCE OF FORGERY – INGREDIENTS OF THE OFFENCE OF FORGERY

---

“Sections 364 and 366 of the Penal Code Law also provide –

“364. Whoever commits forgery shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to fourteen years or with fine or with both.

366. Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any document which he knows or has reason to believe to be a forged document, shall be punished in the same manner as if he forged the document.”

The ingredients of the offence of forgery under Section 364 of the Penal Code are:

(a)(i) That the accused made, signed, sealed or executed the document in question or any part thereof; or

(ii)That it was made by someone else

(b)That it was made under any of the circumstances in Section 363.

(c)That the accused made it dishonestly or fraudulently or with any of the specific intents enumerated in section 362.

While the essential ingredients to be proved under Section 366 of the Penal Code are:

(a)“That the accused used a document as genuine.

(b)That the accused knew or had reason to believe that the document was forged.

(c)That he did so fraudulently or dishonestly.”

The explanatory notes under Section 366 of the Penal Code state additionally thus:

(1)Under this section not only a dishonest user of a false document but also the forger himself may be prosecuted if there is evidence of use but insufficient proof of forgery.

(2)To constitute an offence under this section there must be both knowledge and fraudulent intention. The two questions which arise are:

(a)Whether the accused knew or had reason to believe the document to be forged; and

(b)Whether he used the document fraudulently or dishonestly.

PER J.H.SANKEY, J.C.A

 

---

CASES CITED

---

Not Available

 

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

Advance Fee Fraud and Other Related Offences Act, 2006

Penal Code Law Cap 102, Laws of Borno State.

 

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT