CORAM
ADEMOLA CHIEF JUSTICE, NIGERIA
BRETT JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ONYEAMA JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
IDIGBE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
COKER JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
CHUKWU OBAJI
APPELLANTS
THE STATE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant was convicted of the offence of murder and has appealed against the conviction
HELD
The court held that it is of the view that the correct direction in law is that in relation to murder, “provocation” in Section 318 of the Criminal Code requires consideration of the nature of the weapon or force used as a mode of resentment bearing some reasonable relation to the provocation received, the disproportion being a factor for the jury to consider in determining whether the accused had completely lost control of himself or was acting for a reason other than complete loss of self-control caused by sudden provocation and accordingly allowed the appeal and accordingly quashed the verdict of guilty of murder and a verdict of guilty of manslaughter and a sentence of imprisonment with hand labour for 15 years be substituted therefore.
ISSUES
Whether the trial court rightly convicted the appellant of the offence of murder
RATIONES DECIDENDI
TEST OF PROVOCATION
“And for the purpose of Sec.318 provocation includes (1) any wrongful act or insult (2) of such a nature when done to an ordinary person as is likely (a) to deprive him of the power of Self-control, and (b) to induce him to assault the person by whom the act or Insult is done or offered”. ADEMOLA, C.J.N
TEST OF PROVOCATION.
“To avail himself of the defence in a charge of murder under Sec. 318 of the Criminal Code, the accused must have done the act for which he Is charged (i) in the heat of passion, (ii) this must have been caused by sudden provocation, and (iii) the act must have been committed before there is time for his passion to cool”.- ADEMOLA, C.J.N
CASES CITED
Mancini v. D.P.P. (1942) A.C. 1
Holmes v. D.P.P. (1946) A.C. 588
R. v. Nwanjoku (1937) 3 W.A.C.A. 208,
Attorney-General of Ceylon v. Perera (1953) A.C. 200.
R. v. Sabri Isa (1952) Q.S.R. 269 (Digested in 1952 Supplement of the Australian Digest, Columns 87-89).
R v. Herlihy (1956) Q.S.R. 599 (Digested in 1956 Supplement of the Australian Digest, Columns 125 and 126).
R. v. Young (1957) Q.S.R. 599 (Digested in 1957 Supplement of the Australian Digest, Columns 118 and 119).
Mehemet Ali v. R. (1957) 59 W.A.L.R. 28 (1958 Australian Digest, Column 105)
Bank of Eng land v. Vagliano Brothers (1891) A.C. 197
R. v. John Okoro (1942) 16 NLR. 63 at pp. 65 and 66
R. v. James Adekanmi (1943) 17 N.LR. 99 at pp. 101 and 102.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Criminal Code Act
Ceylon Penal Code
Criminal Code of Queensland (Australia)