GODWIN IKPEAMOGU NWAUGOAGWU & ANOR VS THE QUEEN - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

GODWIN IKPEAMOGU NWAUGOAGWU & ANOR VS THE QUEEN

THE QUEEN VS GOVERNOR-IN-COUNCIL, WESTERN REGION
September 5, 2025
BELLO ADELEKE VS FALADE AWOLIYI & ANOR
September 5, 2025
THE QUEEN VS GOVERNOR-IN-COUNCIL, WESTERN REGION
September 5, 2025
BELLO ADELEKE VS FALADE AWOLIYI & ANOR
September 5, 2025
Show all

GODWIN IKPEAMOGU NWAUGOAGWU & ANOR VS THE QUEEN

Legalpedia Citation: (1962-05) Legalpedia 70959 (SC)

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Holden at Lagos

Wed May 2, 1962

Suit Number: SC 9/1962

CORAM


TAYLOR, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

BAIRAMIAN, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

BRETT, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


APPELLANTS


THE QUEEN

RESPONDENTS 


AREA(S) OF LAW


CRIMINAL LAW—ATTEMPTED MURDER—INGREDIENT OF OFFENCE—WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE—APPEAL

 

 


SUMMARY OF FACTS

The accused/appellant was arrested under a warrant on the 27th June, 1961, and brought up the next day for trial before the Ehime District Court. He objected to the constitution of panel as the complainant sat, the court upheld his objection, but did not allow him bail. In cell he disturbed and was brought to court and sentenced to a fine of £75 or three months imprisonment in default for contempt of court, Igwe Kemkwo taking part in the decision. He was unable to pay the fine on the spot and was returned to the cells again. Shortly afterwards, the appellant burst out of the cells with a matchet in his hand, and struck Igwe Kemkwo a blow with it, which caused a coronal incised wound of the scalp penetrating through the depth of the outer scalp table fracturing the scalp.

 

 


HELD


Appeal Allowed: Conviction for attempted murder set aside: Conviction under section 135(a) Criminal Code set aside: Conviction under section 135(b) Criminal Code, substituted.

 

 


ISSUES


Not Available

 


RATIONES DECIDENDI


INGREDIENT OF MURDER


“There was no dispute that an actual intention to kill is required, and that an intention to cause grievous harm, though sufficient to sustain a conviction for murder it death results, is not sufficient to sustain a conviction for attempted murder.” Per BRETT F.J.

 

 


CASES CITED


1. R. v. Albert (1960) W.R.N.LR 31

2. Stirland v. D.P.P. (1944) A.C. 315

 

 


STATUTES REFERRED TO


1. The Criminal Code

2. The Federal Supreme Court Ordinance, 1960

3. The Customary Courts taw, 1956

 

 


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.