THE GOVERNOR OF LAGOS STATE vs. PASTOR ADEDAMOLA WEMIMO ODUNAIYA
April 13, 2025DANJUMA GIDEON vs. THE STATE
April 13, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2017) Legalpedia (CA) 77611
In the Court of Appeal
HOLDEN AT OWERRI
Sun Aug 13, 2017
Suit Number: CA/OW/162C/2016
CORAM
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
ITA GEORGE MBABA
PARTIES
IGBANI JOHNSON KALU APPELLANTS
INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
This is an interlocutory criminal appeal against the ruling of the Federal High Court sitting in the Umuahia Judicial Division. In the ruling, the lower Court overruled/dismissed the no case submission made by the Appellant. Being dissatisfied with the aforementioned ruling of the lower Court, the Appellant initiated this appeal.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed.
ISSUES
Whether the learned trial Judge was right when he failed to apply the law to this case in overruling the no case submission?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
EXERCISE OF DISCRETION– WHETHER AN APPELLATE COURT CAN INTERFERE WITH A LOWER COURT’S EXERCISE OF DISCRETION
“In this regard I cannot but note that a Court in the exercise of its discretion in respect of a matter, is not expected to act on the whim or caprice of the presiding Judge or Magistrate and also that where a lower Court has exercised its discretion in respect of a matter judicially and judiciously, it is not for an appellate Court to interfere with the exercise of the discretion on the ground that it would have exercised the said discretion in some other way than the lower Court did. See the case of Dokubo-Asari V. FRN (2007) LPELR 958(SC), (2007) 12 NWLR (Pt.1048) 320, wherein the Supreme Court expressed the above view thus:-
‘Except where a miscarriage of justice has been established or that there is a violation of some principles of law or procedure, or that the discretion is known to have been wrongly exercised, or where the exercise was tainted with some illegality or substantial irregularity, an Appeal Court seldom interferes with the learned trial judge’s exercise of discretion. This is because discretion is of the trial Court and not of the appellate Court hence it cannot substitute its own discretion.”
NO CASE SUBMISSION – PRINCIPLES GOVERNING A NO CASE SUBMISSION
“The principles or criteria governing or applicable to a no case submission as said hereinbefore have been considered by the Courts over the years. The Supreme Court in recent times has also done this in two cases. The cases bring to the fore what a no case submission is all about and what is to be pried into in considering whether or not a trial Court is correct in upholding or not upholding the submission if made before it. The first of the cases is that of AGBO V. STATE (2013) LPELR 20388 (SC). Fabiyi, JSC; in the leading judgment of the Court said thus:-
‘The applicable law in respect of this matter is Section 286 of the Criminal Procedure Act (C.P.A.) Cap 41, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 which reads as follows:-
‘If at the close of the evidence in support of the charge it appears to the Court that a case is not made out against the defendant sufficiently to require him to make a defence, the Court shall, as to that particular charge discharge him.”
“It is very common for defence counsel to take umbrage under the above provision of the law to lay claim to what is often referred to as ‘a no case submission’ on behalf of accused persons. It is however, certain that a no case submission should only be made and upheld if any of the two situations stated hereunder prevails at the end of the prosecution’s case, viz:-
1. There was no legally admissible evidence to prove an essential element of the alleged offence.
2. The evidence adduced has been so discredited as a result of cross-examination or the evidence is so manifestly unreliable that no reasonable Tribunal can safely convict on it.
However, if a reasonable Tribunal can convict on the available evidence, then there is a case to answer. It has been held that however slight evidence linking an accused person with the commission of the offence charged might be, the case ought to proceed for the accused to explain his own side of the matter. See: Ibeziako V. C.O.P (1963) 1 ALL NLR 61; Lord Parker, Lord Chief Justice Of England’s Practice Direction In (1962) 1 WRN (SIC) 227; Daboh & Anr. V. The State (1977) 5 SC 197 AT 209; Adeyemi V. The State (1991) 7 SC (PT. 11) 1; (1991) NWLR (PT. 193) 1.”
NO CASE SUBMISSION – INGREDIENT A COURT SHOULD CONSIDER IN A NO CASE SUBMISSION
“It is now basic that in considering a submission of no case to answer it is not necessary at that stage to determine whether the evidence is sufficient to justify a conviction. The Court only has to be satisfied that there is a prima facie case which requires at least some explanation from the accused person.”
PRIMA FACIE CASE – WHEN DOES EVIDENCE DISCLOSE A PRIMA FACIE CASE?
“As inferred by Abott, F.J. in Ajidagba V. IGP (1958) SC NLR 60, prima facie case is not the same as proof which comes later when the Court may find whether the accused is guilty or not. Evidence discloses a prima facie case when it is such that if uncontradicted and if believed it will be sufficient to prove the case against the accused. On his own part, Nnamani, JSC (of blessed memory) in Duru V. Nwosu (1989) 1 NWLR (PT. 113) 24 AT 43 maintained that prima facie case means that ‘there is ground for proceeding.’ In other words, that something has been produced to make it worthwhile to continue with the proceedings. On the face of it (prima facie) ‘suggests that the evidence produced so far indicates that there is something worth looking at.”
PRIMA FACIE CASE – DEFINITION OF PRIMA FACIE CASE
“It is also apt to state it here that in Black’s Law Dictionary 6th Edition at page 1189-1190, the expression – ‘prima facie case’ has been defined to mean – ‘such as will prevail until contradicted and overcome by the other evidence. A case which has proceeded upon sufficient proof to that stage where it will support finding if evidence to the contrary is disregarded.’ prima facie evidence is ‘evidence good and sufficient on its face.’.”
NO CASE SUBMISSION – PURPORT OF A NO CASE SUBMISSION
“The purport of a no case submission is that the Court is not called upon at that stage to express any opinion on the evidence before it. The Court is only called upon to take note and rule accordingly that there is before the Court no legally admissible evidence linking the accused person with the commission of the offence charged. But if there is legally admissible evidence, however slight, the matter should proceed as there is something to look at. See: Igabele V. The State (Supra); Aituma V. The State(2007) 5NWLR (PT. 1028) 466.”
NO CASE SUBMISSION – DUTY OF COURT WHEN CONSIDERING A NO CASE SUBMISSION
“At the stage of no case submission, credibility of prosecution witnesses should not be considered. It is not a stage where a Court can believe or disbelieve prosecution witnesses as the defence is yet to present its own witnesses. The Court is enjoined to avoid the temptation of being lured to pronounce on the merits or otherwise of the available evidence. A ruling on ‘a no case submission’ should not be of inordinate length. See Ajiboye V. The State (1995) 9 SCNJ 442.”
NO CASE SUBMISSION – DETERMINATION OF A NO CASE SUBMISSION
“I dare to say that ‘a no case submission’ should be determined within the narrow compass of the legally admissible evidence produced by the prosecution; and such should be based on its face value. Based on the available evidence called by the prosecution, without at this stage, expressing an opinion on it, can it be said that there was no evidence connecting the appellants with the alleged crime? See also the case of COP V. Amuta (2017) LPELR 41386 (SC).”
CASES CITED
Not Available
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Administration of Criminal Justice Act
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
Advanced Fee Fraud and Other Related Offences Act, No. 14 of 2006|
