MUHAMMED SANI (HALISCO) V THE STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (2023-04) Legalpedia 68655 (CA)

In the Court of Appeal

SOKOTO JUDICIAL DIVISION

Fri Apr 14, 2023

Suit Number: CA/S/127C/2022

CORAM

MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU JCA

ABUBAKAR MAHMUD TALBA JCA

MOHAMMED DANJUMA JCA

PARTIES

MUHAMMED SANI (AKA HALISCO)

APPELLANTS

THE STATE

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

APPEAL, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE

SUMMARY OF FACTS

During an altercation between the accused (Appellant) and the husband of the deceased, the accused used an axe to hit the deceased on her head thereby resulting in her death on the spot. This took place in the house of the village head.

The accused was charged with committing culpable homicide.

In a reserved but considered judgment delivered on 3/2/2018, the learned trial judge found the accused guilty as charged and accordingly sentenced him to death.

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower Court, the appellant filed this appeal.

HELD

Appeal dismissed

ISSUES

Ø Whether having regard to the entirety of the evidence before the trial Court and the circumstances of the case, the trial Court was right in holding that the appellant was guilty of the offence of culpable homicide contrary to Section 221 (b) of the Penal Code?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CULPABLE HOMICIDE – INGREDIENTS OF THE OFFENSE OF CULPABLE HOMICIDE

It is settled that in order to secure the conviction of an accused person for culpable homicide punishable with death under Section 221 (b) of the Penal Code, the prosecution has the duty of proving beyond reasonable doubt that:

(a) the deceased died,

(b) the death of the deceased was caused by the accused person.

(c) the act of the accused person, which caused the death was done with the intention of causing death, or the accused person knew or had reason to know that death would be the probable and not only a likely consequence of the act or any bodily injury which the act was intended to cause.

It was held in plethora of judicial decisions that a collective proof of the three ingredients above is required to sustain a conviction for the culpable homicide punishable with death. See OGBOKA VS STATE (2021) 17 NWLR (PT 1804) 139. – Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

ADMISSION – WHEN THE ACCUSED ADMITS THE CRIME

It is therefore pertinent to state here that where there is a contradiction in the case of the prosecution, and the person accused of a crime as in this case, steps up and admits to committing the crime, the contradiction is rendered irrelevant. Besides, minor and insignificant contradictions in the case of the prosecution are not so unusual. See KAWU Vs STATE (2020) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1740) 39.

Furthermore, it is absurd to set up defences of accident and self-defence while at the same time alleging that the cause of the deceased’s death was inconclusive. – Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

INTENT TO KILL – HOW INTENT TO KILL COULD BE INFERRED

Intent to kill or do grievous bodily harm could however be inferred from the following: –

(a) the situation of the parties,

(b) the conduct and declaration of the accused,

(d) the nature of the weapons and means used.

In the instant case, taking the above factors in view, the conduct and the declaration of the appellant as gathered from the evidence of PW3 and PW4 showing that the appellant pursued PW3 to the residence of the village where he inflicted wounds on PW3 and also strucked the deceased (nine-months old pregnant woman) with an axe on the skull as well as his declaration that “he kill her and let’s someone also kill him,” clearly manifested the appellant’s intent to kill. Thus, the intent to cause death of the deceased was on full display with the ultimate result being anticipated as consequence of death. ADEMOLA VS STATE (1988) 1 NWLR(PT. 73) 683, NWALI VS STATE (1991) 3 NWLR (PT. 182) 663 AND OMAH VS STATE (2021) 18 NWLR (PT. 1807) 1 @ 24.– Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

ACCIDENT – MEANING OF ACCIDENT

An accident is an event which is a result of an unwilled act and without the fault of the person alleged to have caused it. For an accident to qualify as an accident, it must be a surprise to the ordinary man of prudence, that is, a surprise to all sober and reasonable people. See ADEGBOYE VS STATE (2017) 16 NWLR (PT. 1591) 248.– Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

ACCIDENT – WHEN THE DEFENCE OF ACCIDENT SHOULD BE RAISED

A defence of accident will be rejected where the accused did not raise the defence at the first opportunity. – Per M. L. Shuaibu, JCA

JUSTICE – JUSTICE IS A THREE WAY TRAFFIC

It is settled law that justice is not a one-way traffic or a two-way traffic rather it is a three-way traffic. Justice for the accused who is charged with a heinous crime. Justice for the society whose culture and value is desecrated. And justice for the victim who is crying loud in his or her grave for justice. But in this instant case, justice is a four-way traffic. Justice is also for the baby who is yet to unborn. – Per A. M. Talba, JCA