CHIEF OTOOLA ATANDA AND ORS VS TAIWO AKUNYUN AND ORS
July 17, 2025ALHAJI LAMIDI DAODU OLOWOSAGO VS ALHAJI AMUDA I. ADEBANJO
July 17, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1988-10) Legalpedia (SC) 16193
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Oct 7, 1988
Suit Number: SC. 56/1987
CORAM
NNAMANI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ESO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BELGORE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
NGWO KALU
APPELLANTS
THE STATE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
MURDER-DISCREPANCY IN WITNESS EVIDENCE
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant sought an order of court discharging and acquitting him of murder.
HELD
The Court held that if the learned trial judge had adverted his mind to the discrepancy he would have inevitably come to the conclusion that the case of the prosecution was not free from doubt, and that doubt should have been resolved in favour of the appellant
ISSUES
Whether doubt in the testimony of PW6 in regard of the case against second accused apply equally to the case against the appellant
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CONTRADICTIONS IN EVIDENCE.
‘ It is not every minor contradiction that is fatal to a case and for a trial judge to disbelieve a witness, the contradiction in his evidence must be on a material point.’ – S. O. KAWU, JSC
CASES CITED
1. Joseph Aderemi v. The State (1975) 9-11 SC. 111
2. Jimoh Ishola v. The State (1978) 9-11 SC. 81 at p.110
3. Nathaniel Nasamu v. The State (1979) 6-9 SC. 153
4. Queen v. Ekanem (1960) 5 FSC.14.
5. Seismograph Ltd. v. Ogbemi (1976) 4 SC. 85.
6. Akosile v. The State (1972) 5 SC. 332
STATUTES REFERRED TO
1. Criminal Code Cap. 30 Vol. 11, Laws of Eastern Nigeria 1963
