CORAM

---

Onyekachi Aja Otisi-Justice court of appeal

James Gambo Abundaga-Justice court of appeal

Muslim Sule Hassan-Justice court of appeal

---

PARTIES

---

IDRIS ABDULLAHI ADAMU

APPELLANTS 

---

THE STATE

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

CRIMINAL LAW, EVIDENCE, FAIR HEARING, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, JURISDICTION

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant, Idris Abdullahi Adamu, was charged with the rape of a 13-year-old girl, Maryam Abdullahi, in Kaduna State. It was alleged that the Appellant lured the victim into his room where the act was committed, resulting in her pregnancy. The prosecution presented five witnesses, including the victim, her father, and the investigating officer. The Appellant denied the allegations and called two defense witnesses, including himself. The trial court found the Appellant guilty and sentenced him to life imprisonment. Dissatisfied, the Appellant appealed on the grounds that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt and that the trial court wrongly relied on contradictory evidence.

 

---

HELD

---

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment. The court held that the prosecution had proven the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the Appellant’s defense was weak and unsupported by credible evidence. The court found that the trial court properly relied on the victim’s testimony, the confessional statement, and other corroborating evidence to reach its decision.

 

---

ISSUES

---

1. Whether the trial court erred in convicting the Appellant despite the prosecution’s alleged failure to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt?

2. Whether the prosecution’s evidence, including the confessional statement and testimony of the victim, was sufficiently reliable to sustain a conviction?

3. Whether the trial court properly rejected the Appellant’s defense, considering the alleged contradictions in the prosecution’s case?

4. Whether the trial court adequately considered the victim’s age and pregnancy in delivering its judgment?

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

STANDARD OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL CASES – REQUIREMENT TO PROVE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT

---

“The prosecution is required to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. This does not mean beyond any doubt, but such that it leaves no reasonable hypothesis except the guilt of the accused – Per Muslim Sule Hassan, J.C.A.

 

---

CORROBORATION IN RAPE CASES – CREDIBILITY OF VICTIM’S TESTIMONY IN RAPE CASES INVOLVING MINORS

---

“In cases of rape involving minors, corroboration of the victim’s testimony is not a legal requirement if the evidence of the prosecutrix is credible and compelling enough to sustain a conviction.” – Per Onyekachi Aja Otisi, J.C.A.

 

---

ADMISSIBILITY OF CONFESSIONAL STATEMENTS – REQUIREMENT FOR VOLUNTARINESS

---

“A confessional statement made voluntarily and corroborated by other facts of the case is admissible and can be relied upon to secure a conviction, provided the statement is credible and consistent with the other evidence before the court.”– Per James Gambo Abundaga, J.C.A.

 

---

FAIR HEARING – ACCUSED PERSON’S OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THEIR CASE

---

An accused cannot claim denial of fair hearing where they had ample opportunity to present their case and challenge the prosecution’s evidence but failed to do so effectively.” – Per Muslim Sule Hassan, J.C.A.

 

---

CONTRADICTIONS IN PROSECUTION’S CASE – WHEN CONTRADICTIONS ARE MATERIAL

---

“Minor contradictions in the prosecution’s case do not automatically result in acquittal unless such contradictions are material to the elements of the offence charged and significantly undermine the credibility of the case.” – Per Onyekachi Aja Otisi, J.C.A.

 

---

AGE OF THE VICTIM – ESTABLISHING THE AGE OF THE VICTIM THROUGH PARENTAL TESTIMONY

---

“In determining the age of a victim in cases of rape involving minors, the testimony of the victim’s parents, coupled with the testimony of the victim, is often sufficient to establish age in the absence of conflicting evidence.” – Per James Gambo Abundaga, J.C.A.

 

---

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE – WHEN PRESUMPTION IS DISPLACED

---

“The presumption of innocence guaranteed by the Constitution is displaced when the prosecution presents compelling and credible evidence proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.” – Per Muslim Sule Hassan, J.C.A.

 

---

FAILURE TO CROSS-EXAMINE ON MATERIAL POINTS – CONSEQUENCES FOR THE DEFENSE

---

“Failure to cross-examine prosecution witnesses on key aspects of their testimony leaves such evidence unchallenged, and the court is entitled to rely on it in reaching its decision.” – Per Onyekachi Aja Otisi, J.C.A.

 

---

PREGNANCY AS CORROBORATING EVIDENCE – RELEVANCE OF PREGNANCY IN RAPE CASES INVOLVING MINORS

---

“The fact of pregnancy in a minor, especially in a case of rape, serves as corroborative evidence supporting the victim’s testimony, even in the absence of a medical report confirming the pregnancy.” – Per James Gambo Abundaga, J.C.A.

 

---

CONFESSIONAL STATEMENTS – RETRACTION DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY RENDER IT INADMISSIBLE

---

“A confessional statement, even if retracted, remains admissible provided it was made voluntarily. The court must, however, assess the truthfulness of the statement by examining its consistency with other evidence in the case.” – Per Muslim Sule Hassan, J.C.A.

 

---

MINOR’S TESTIMONY – CREDIBILITY OF A MINOR’S TESTIMONY WITHOUT CORROBORATION

---

“In cases of rape involving minors, the testimony of the victim, if credible and consistent with other facts, does not require corroboration to secure a conviction.” – Per Onyekachi Aja Otisi, J.C.A.

 

---

PREGNANCY AS EVIDENCE OF RAPE – WHEN MEDICAL REPORT IS NOT NECESSARY

---

“In circumstances where the fact of pregnancy is uncontested and consistent with the victim’s account of the offence, the absence of a medical report confirming the pregnancy is not fatal to the prosecution’s case.” – Per James Gambo Abundaga, J.C.A.

 

---

SUBSTITUTED SERVICE – PROPER USE OF SUBSTITUTED SERVICE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

---

“Substituted service is permissible in criminal proceedings where personal service cannot be effected, provided that the method of substituted service ensures that the accused is properly notified of the charges against them.” – Per Muslim Sule Hassan, J.C.A

 

---

CASES CITED

---

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

• Section 258(1) of the Penal Code Law of Kaduna State, 2017 (as amended)

• Section 36(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended)

• Section 135 of the Evidence Act 2011

•     Court of Appeal Rules 2021, Order 19 Rule 10(3)

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGEMENT