BRIGBO & ORS VS EYIN PESSU & ORS
August 11, 2025ANASTATIUS UWAKWE V. THE STATE
August 11, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1974-09Legalpedia (SC) 13192
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Sep 27, 1974
Suit Number: SC. 180/1974
CORAM
A.G. IRIKEFE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
EMANUEL OBIOMA OGWUEGBU, JSC. JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT (Read the Leading Judgment)
GEORGE S. SOWEMIMO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
CHRISTOPHER N. ONUBOGU
BERTRAM ONUBOGU
APPELLANTS
THE STATE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE / EVIDENCE
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellants were charged and convicted for malicious damage to property and unlawful wounding on the contradictory and inconsistent evidence of prosecution witnesses.
HELD
The court held that the appellants ought to have been discharged and acquitted and accordingly discharged and acquitted them.
ISSUES
Whether the learned trial judge was right in law and on the facts in holding that the prosecution had established its case beyond reasonable doubt when the evidence of Lawrence Okani (P.W.4) and other prosecution witnesses were clearly unreliable, unconvincing and fall short of the standard required to establish proof of guilt in a criminal trial.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
INCONSISTENT EVIDENCE OF TWO WITNESSES
We also think that even if the inconsistency in the testimony of the two witnesses can be explained, it is not the function of the trial judge, as was the case here, to provide the explanation witness. Per Sowemimo J.S.C
INCONSISTENT EVIDENCE OF A WITNESS
Where a witness has made previous statements inconsistent with the evidence given at the trial, the court has been slow to act on the evidence of such a witness. Per Sowemimo J.S.C
CASES CITED
1. R. v Fraser & Anor (1957) App. R. 160 at p. 163
2. R. v. Golder (1960) 1 WLR 1169
3. The Queen v. Joshua (1964) 1 All NLR p.1 at page 3
4. Summer and Leivesley v. Brown & Co. (1909) 25 TLR 745
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available
