CORAM
ADEMOLA, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
UNSWORTH, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
TAYLOR, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
APPELLANTS
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
CRIMINAL LAW – ASSAULT-EVIDENCE
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The evidence show that the appellant hit the complainant with a working stick but there were contradictions in the prosecution witnesses as to whether the appellant pierced the complaint’s eye with a working stick resulting in total loss of sight. He was sentenced to 9 months imprisonment with hard labour.
HELD
The court held that the appellant ought to have been convicted under section 351 of the Criminal code and reduced the sentence to 10 pounds or I month imprisonment.
ISSUES
Whether the lower courts were right in relying on the contradictory evidence of the prosecution in convicting the appellant under section 353 of the criminal code and imposing an excessive sentence of 9 months imprisonment.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
EFFECT OF PROVIDING CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
‘The court cannot rely on an irreconcilable contradictory evidence of the prosecution in convicting an accused person.’ Per Taylor, F.J
CASES CITED
Not Available
STATUTES REFERRED TO
The Criminal Code