CORAM

---

GEORGE S. SOWEMIMO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

MOHAMMED BELLO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

ALOYSIUS IGYORGYER KATSINA-ALU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

---

PARTIES

---

CLEMENT NWANCHI

---

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant was tried and convicted on Counts 1 and 2 of a three count charge of corruption in the High Court of the Benue-Plateau State Judicial Division on the 31st day of May, 1975 and sentenced to a term of two years imprisonment on each count, sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The appellant was aggrieved by his conviction, in which he appealed to the Supreme Court.

---

HELD

---

All the grounds of appeal failed due to lack of merit.

---

ISSUES

---

The learned trial Judge erred in law when he convicted the appellant on the charge of accepting gratification of N6.00 from Dzungwe Ashwe to forebear to do an official act, to wit; refraining from prosecuting the said Dzungwe Ashwe when there was evidence that Dzungwe Ashwe was in fact prosecuted and convicted.

The learned trial Judge misdirected himself in law in holding that in respect of count 2, P.W.6 and P.W.7 were not accomplices but victims, and this misdirection has occasioned a miscarriage of justice, because, if the trial Judge had properly directed himself, he would have come to the conclusion that their evidence needed corroboration and there was none.

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

THE DUTY OF THE JUDGE IN A SITUATION WHERE A PERSON WHO IS AN ACCOMPLICE GIVES EVIDENCE ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION

---

“In a criminal trial, under English law, where a person who is an accomplice gives evidence on behalf of the prosecution, it is the duty of the Judge to warn the jury that although they may convict on his evidence, it is dangerous to do so unless it is corroborated.” Per OBASEKI, AG. JSC

---

CASES CITED

---

Davies v. D.P.P. (1954) AC 378 at 379

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

None.

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT