CORAM
ADEMOLA, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
BRETT, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
DUFFUS, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
APPELLANTS
INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
CRIMINAL LAW – FALSE PETENSES-SECTION 116 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant was convicted for fraudulently assisting co-accused persons, to obtain duplicate professional driving licenses for themselves by the false pretence that they had previously held licenses and corruption.
HELD
The court held that it was not necessary to show what happened at the registry provided the application for the license materially affected the grant.
ISSUES
Whether the appellant was properly convicted for the offenses charged.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
VALUE OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
‘On a charge of obtaining by false pretences “it is immaterial that the prosecutor was influenced by other circumstances than the false pretence charged provided the false pretence charged influenced him in part and materially affected his judgment.’ Per Brett F.J.
ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENCE CREATED BY S. 116 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE.
‘for a conviction to be had under s.116 it is not essential to prove that the accused received the bribe in order to do or omit to do anything in the course of any specific duty imposed on him’. Per Brett F.J.
CASES CITED
1. Reg. v. Lince 12 Cox’s Criminal Law Cases 451;
2. Reg. v. English 12 Cox’s Criminal Law Cases 171
STATUTES REFERRED TO
ALASAN BABATUNDE, AJAGUNNA II OLUKARE OF IKARE VS GOVERNOR, WESTERN REGION 1960 FSC 207/1959 [1960] NSCC 41
The criminal code.